I assume it’s not strictly necessary to download it. Most people are running a single cloud instance, who may or may not have a backup S3 bucket. Downloading the backup would be the only way for this group to make an off-site backup, like you mentioned.
I would even go as far as to make an additional backup system on a completely different provider as well, especially after what recently happened to this open source dev. Regardless of its validity, it’s a great warning to have a weekly or monthly backup to an entirely separate storage location/provider.
Thanks @pfaffman for adding this, really painless now! (except for restoring a large backup which is always a little bit of a tense and long wait whatever the setup).
btw I think this path is incorrect: should be web-only (by default) I think?:
Yeah. web-only and that is a bit confusing when in every other context it is web_only. But perhaps when something is a directory or a container-what-ever is different thing.
What the I know… I just wasted 4 hours fighting with SearXNG and that should be 5 mins jobs (I really dislike docker things)
edit and off topic
Really he and ck is a banned word? It was teached to us in school as a non-offended word. So, they were wrong, obvious
I think that might have been added when watched words were first being tested and just never got removed.
Yeah. I get confused about that often. In fact, I think that’s probably why once when I tried to just rename things to switch from single to double-container I got the underscore/dash thing wrong and it failed.
And worse, I am pretty sure it’s my fault. I got some error when I created the two-container option in discourse-setup (maybe containers couldn’t have underscores?) Ruby likes underscores in filenames, so maybe that’s why I used an underscore there? I think that’s it–and I think web_only can’t work as a docker container name since they also need to be valid hostnames.
I prefer hyphens in directory paths, so all good as it is, and underscore in the container name honestly, makes sense, so leave it as it is.
btw, I think there should be a title or a self-certified badge on meta for those rocking the two container setup Once you’ve been here for a year, I think it should be mandatory for your standard installs to be migrated.
If not for so much existing documentation about the single-container setup, I’d almost argue that it should be the default, though there’d need to be some tooling to let people know that the database might need attention, or something.
I often see lots of people unhappy about and otherwise scared of two-container installs. (Recently someone wanted the two-container install I’d create when I did their install moved to a single container, for example.) It’s so very rare that it’s a problem, and the one time that it causes problems, it actually saves some hassle since it makes it easy to put off a Postgres Upgrade until you’re ready to do it. You can usually put off a PG upgrade for a good while (except when the AI plugin got added to core and required that extension).
At some points in the past the build process would chown all the files, but it can take a really long time, so I think that may have been removed at some point (this is more than a feeling than anything based on paying attention to commits).
Mostly. ./launcher will do a git pull (at least I thought so, but maybe not?) first and you’re more likely to have tab-completion working for docker than ./launcher.