cloudcmd VS Portainer

I assume it is this one: https://cloudcmd.io/

Personally, and I can't name a tool for you, I consider that:

- files&folder taxonomies are limited. Sometimes a file should be in more than one place, there are links/symlinks but no "backlinks" so it's easy top break things and filenames are not much good for search. Essentially a path in a file&folder classic taxonomy is a kind of limited and limited query to reach some content;

- notes are another interesting things: ALL documents are kind of notes. The fact we have many file formats and apps just to craft document is more a limit and an issue of modern systems that a reasonable thing.

Given the above two consideration I decide for myself to org-attach almost anything. The complete setup is:

- org-roam, org-ql (with a semi-curated catalog to make queries and yasnippets to ensure consistency) and ripgrep as access layer, witch practically means hitting a single key on my keyboard and start typing something. In 99% of the case I get "the good answer" (something already done or new content to add), sometimes I need rg/recoll because just heading/tags search do not work and in that case I adjust/add some roam_aliases to easy mach the content in the future. Sometimes I need queries to work on things, like "check all active contracts" or "current issue" or "last three days notes" etc;

- org-attach and links and dired to craft small "secondary-level file hierarchies" as a storage management layers, something that hide my real home taxonomy (essentially just notes on one root, other files managed by org-attach under another in a cache-like tree) I access via links;

- various org-mode extras to link different kind of stuff I can't org-attach properly, like mails (individual messages, threads, search queries on my mails etc), transactions (hledger via org-babel), mere elisp:(sexp) code to be executed live on click.

Doing so allow me to IGNORE a limited and limited hierarchy, allow crafting dynamic hierarchies as results from SQL-alike (albeit limited and slow) queries, accessing most of the content in search&narrow style something proven to be effective in most kind of UI from search engines to "dashes" instead of "menus" etc and allow to blend a bit most kind of docs in a single "document"/page/live environment witch is VERY useful since we have a single mind, not really compartmentalized and we need different kind of "docs" together often.

This is IMVHO how we should manage files in 2022 BUT since Emacs and classic desktop model for commercial and ignorance reasons is essentially dead it's not something ready out-of-the-box and not something designed for collaboration. It's just a personal HYPER-effective solution that might wrap&hide far less effective one used by collaborators still allowing interaction.

The modern equivalent, far more limited, complex and heavyweight is a DMS (see Nuxeo, Alfresco, ...) mostly crappy WebUIs that wrap Apache Jackrabbit behind the scene and add some forms/tags/ways to classify documents in various "dynamic" and "less constrained" ways. With a bit of hesitation for a small team https://www.tagspaces.org is less crazy to setup and use. Othe simpler but probably too limited options are https://github.com/filebrowser/filebrowser or https://cloudcmd.io/ or https://filerun.com/ or https://www.seafile.com/ or https://tabbles.net/ some are proprietary and all are not much more than classic file browsers served via webapp on a file-server backend storage instead of a local one.

Cloud Commander - Web based remote file manager, while there are a handful of them it's the one I keep coming back to.

Fire up a Docker container of cloudcmd, map your volumes, and go nuts.

check out Cloudcommander (like MC but in a browser)

You should have a look at cloudcmd. It's a browser-based file manager with drag&drop which also offers an SSH shell/terminal emulation.

Cloudcmd - browser-based ssh terminal and file manager (read: byobu, screen, and all the other terminal apps like taskbook, now count as being 'self-hosted') - - there are a few browser-based RDP programs like Apache Guacamole Server, but I haven't tried them (yet).

Cloudcmd?

Portainer

> Any tips on the minimum hardware or VPS's needed to get a small swarm cluster setup?

From my testing, Docker Swarm is very lightweight, uses less memory than both Hashicorp Nomad and lightweight Kubernetes distros (like K3s). Most of the resource requirements will depend on what containers you actually want to run on the nodes.

You might build a cluster from a bunch of Raspberry Pis, some old OptiPlex boxes or laptops, or whatever you have laying around and it's mostly going to be okay. On a practical level, anything with 1-2 CPU cores and 4 GB of RAM will be okay for running any actually useful software, like a web server/reverse proxy, some databases (PostgreSQL/MySQL/MariaDB), as well as either something for a back end or some pre-packaged software, like Nextcloud.

So, even 5$/month VPSes are more than suitable, even from some of the more cheap hosts like Hetzner or Contabo (though the latter has a bad rep for limited/no support).

That said, you might also want to look at something like Portainer for a nice web based UI, for administering the cluster more easily, it really helps with discoverability and also gives you redeploy web hooks, to make CI easier: https://www.portainer.io/ (works for both Docker Swarm as well as Kubernetes, except the Kubernetes ingress control was a little bit clunky with Traefik instead of Nginx)

In this section, we will add Portainer to help us in managing our Docker containers. You can find more details about it here. To integrate Portainer into our EC2 project, we can follow these steps:

Git issues pointing to: https://docs.portainer.io/v/ce-2.9/start/install/agent/swarm/linux gives a ERR_TOO_MANY_REDIRECTS.

I am currently running Portainer, but webhooks (GitOps) appear to be broken ( [2.19.0] GitOps Updates not automatically polling from git · Issue #10309 · portainer/portainer · GitHub ) and so I cannot send webhook to redeploy a stack. So, looking for alternatives. Using this as a good excuse to learn more about docker and CI/CD etc.

A Synology NAS running Portainer (https://www.portainer.io/) running Paperless NGX (https://github.com/paperless-ngx/paperless-ngx)

This works better than I can possibly tell you.

I have an Epson WorkForce ES-580W that I bought when my mother passed away to bulk scan documents and it scans everything, double-sided if required, multi-page PDFs if required, at very high speed and uploads everything to OneDrive, at which point I drag and drop everything into Paperless.

I could, thinking about it, have the scanner email stuff to Paperless. Might investigate that today.

Paperless will OCR it and make it all searchable. This setup is amazing, I love living in the future.

> I've come to the conclusion (after trying kops, kubespray, kubeadm, kubeone, GKE, EKS) that if you're looking for < 100 node cluster, docker swarm should suffice. Easier to setup, maintain and upgrade.

Personally, I'd also consider throwing Portainer in there, which gives you both a nice way to interact with the cluster, as well as things like webhooks: https://www.portainer.io/

With something like Apache, Nginx, Caddy or something else acting as your "ingress" (taking care of TLS, reverse proxy, headers, rate limits, sometimes mTLS etc.) it's a surprisingly simple setup, at least for simple architectures.

casaos it just makes things like backups, offsite syncing and many other nas related things so much easier to manage. And gives you a proper nas like experience similar to that in which you'd fine on companies like tnas or synology. I actually also use it as a replacement for portainer when i don't need the more advanced features it offers

> I moved to docker swarm and love it. It's so much easier, straight forward, automatic ingress network and failover were all working out of the box. I'll stay with swarm for now.

I've had decent luck in the past with the K3s distribution, which is a bit cut down Kubernetes: https://k3s.io/

It also integrates nicely with Portainer (aside from occasional Traefik ingress weirdness sometimes), which I already use for Swarm and would suggest to anyone that wants a nice web based UI: https://www.portainer.io/

Others might also mention K0s, MicroK8s or others - there's lots of options there. But even so, I still run Docker Swarm for most of my private stuff as well and it's a breeze.

For my needs, it has just the right amount of abstractions: stacks with services that use networks and can have some storage in the form of volumes or bind mounts. Configuration in the form of environment variables and/or mounted files (or secrets), some deployment constraints and dependencies sometimes, some health checks and restart policies, as well as resource limits.

If I need a mail server, then I just have a container that binds to the ports (even low port numbers) that I need and configure it. If I need a web server, then I can just run Apache/Nginx/Caddy and use more or less 1:1 configuration files that I'd use when setting up either outside of containers, but with the added benefit of being able to refer to other apps by their service names (or aliases, if they have underscores in the names, which sometimes isn't liked).

At a certain scale, it's dead simple to use - no need for PVs and PVCs, no need for Ingress and Service abstractions, or lots and lots of templating that Helm charts would have (although those are nice in other ways).