Comments

8 comments

  • Avatar
    Firewalla

    I think the issue is really following documentation ... we were under the assumption that users who are willing to touch docker do understand the basics ... which, we are wrong.  

    1. using ~/ as docker data storage, when people load huge lists for pi-hole, it will use up all the disk space ...

    2. load too many images (or versions of images) and not doing prune, which blows up docker image repo, and then blow up the home directory

    We may start to put rules on these but not sure how restrictive we should be.  But in general, we need to reduce the support load on these things.  

    1
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Firewalla

    Unlike the red/blue, the Gold uses docker to install applications.  And since Adguard does have a docker image, so in theory, it is fully possible.  We are likely to create directions for pi-hole first and if enough people interested in this, we can add instructions

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Alex Neth

    +1

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Jason Dyals

    +1

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Michael Bierman

    A tutorial for this would be awesome. 

     

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Firewalla

    We are debating internally on this now.  At the moment, we have seen too many people loading too many things on the boxes, and it is seriously costing support bandwidth (and our developer's time) to educate people on the basics.  The most issue we see is disk usage and docker storage not being cleaned, which then causes the unit to not run properly. 

    It is fairly easy to run docker, but to put some constraint on it is pretty hard. 

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Michael Bierman

    Those are very real concerns. I don't have a lot of pihole or AGH experience. But I have been running homebridge in docker on Firewalla and as long as it is done properly, FWG handles it like a champ.

    I wonder if spending the time on a good tutorial (or having the community contribute on say on a github wiki?) would be enough to get some really good, clear instructions on a preferred setup. Reading through some past threads that went on for many pages of comments it seems like there was consensus on some best practices but it was a bit hard to follow and there may be some differences between pihole and AGH. Also some the advice is not necessarily current so that may confuse some users. 

    Capturing that in one place would be super and hopefully mean a lot less stress on Firewalla Engineers for support. There are a lot of very savvy Firewalla users and I'm sure they could document most of the best practices leaving only the really few hard questions to Firewalla Engineers. 

    Equally valuable is documentation of two configurations: 

    1. Running pihole/AGH on Firewalla in docker. 
    2. Running pihole/AGH on Firewalla on another LAN device. 

     

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Michael Bierman

    @firewalla All those are understandable concerns. There has to be some user responsibility with advanced configurations like these. The more time Firewalla spends supporting users doing these things is that much less time they can spend making great products.

    But these shouldn’t be relevant to a guide for how to configure firewalla with pihole or AGH running on a separate device. Based on what I’ve read so far, that is the configuration I would probably choose if I decided to use AGH. I haven’t upgraded my drive or RAM so I would rather put the load somewhere else.

    Personally I would shy away from doing anything non standard to Linux to prevent users from making configuration changes. It will upset people who know what they are doing and people who don’t will probably astound you with the ways they can break things. They can always reimage and start over. ;)

    as always, thank you for making great products. 

    0
    Comment actions Permalink

Please sign in to leave a comment.