@Mei said:
Interesting service, I'm looking forward on using it. ?
Curious, what's the retention time of the activity logs?
As I managed to accidentally upload some stuff when trying out the Nextcloud Android app as it had auto-upload on by default.
Though, I had deleted the files now but I don't like seeing the filenames in the activity log itself.
I believe the default value is 365 days.
Would be great if @martijnk could set it to 30 days, or even less.
I see no point in storing such data for hundreds of users in the database for a long time.
@Mei said:
Interesting service, I'm looking forward on using it. ?
Curious, what's the retention time of the activity logs?
As I managed to accidentally upload some stuff when trying out the Nextcloud Android app as it had auto-upload on by default.
Though, I had deleted the files now but I don't like seeing the filenames in the activity log itself.
I believe the default value is 365 days.
Would be great if @martijnk could set it to 30 days, or even less.
I see no point in storing such data for hundreds of users in the database for a long time.
I've set it to 7 days now. Saves me some database space as well
@brentybh said:
Upload speed is really slow... can only get 5-10 Mbps from my Stockholm VPS
Same , @martijnk I'm getting 1-2mbps initially it was 10+
Well speed depends on many factors. I can't tell if it's you or me but I'm not limiting bandwidth nor is the line saturated or the servers overloaded. That's all I can say
Nextcloud 21 is released with a optional component written in Rust. This "High Performance Back-end for Files" should massively decrease response times.
Would that also be rolled out for Brick? I wonder if any differences can be detected for the users if that were deployed!
@Groentjuh said:
Nextcloud 21 is released with a optional component written in Rust. This "High Performance Back-end for Files" should massively decrease response times.
Would that also be rolled out for Brick? I wonder if any differences can be detected for the users if that were deployed!
Normally yes, but I will be carefully rolling out upgrades. I don't want to be the first to be onboard with this and I want to test it first. I will probably deploy it within a couple of weeks. Stability first
I got it some time ago.
Honesly great offer, I don't really use it as I don't have anything to store but so far with the few pictures I uploaded the service seems solid, and let's say 1 eur for 200 GB lifetime is an amazing deal.
@skorupion said:
I got it some time ago.
Honesly great offer, I don't really use it as I don't have anything to store but so far with the few pictures I uploaded the service seems solid, and let's say 1 eur for 200 GB lifetime is an amazing deal.
I use NOVOS BRICK to store photos, too.
I figured out Rclone and got it running on my home router (MIPS, 128MB RAM, 2TB external HDD).
When I have new photos in the HDD, I run the rclone sync command.
Upload speed doesn't matter, because it's a one-way backup use case, not multi-device sync.
I have uploaded 90GB so far, and nothing has been lost.
Web UI is slower than my private Nextcloud, because there are so many useless apps.
I disabled most of them in apporder and it gets better.
We accept Karma donations for the last flan. 🍮 affbrr
I keep getting the error "HTTP connection terminated unexpectedly" after uploading about 200MB of a large file. I am using Webdav on a Linux client. I am not sure what is going on.
@poisson said:
I keep getting the error "HTTP connection terminated unexpectedly" after uploading about 200MB of a large file. I am using Webdav on a Linux client. I am not sure what is going on.
How large is the file?
Do you mean that you're using the Nextcloud synchronization client?
"A single swap file or partition may be up to 128 MB in size. [...] [I]f you need 256 MB of swap, you can create two 128-MB swap partitions." (M. Welsh & L. Kaufman, Running Linux, 2e, 1996, p. 49)
@poisson said:
I keep getting the error "HTTP connection terminated unexpectedly" after uploading about 200MB of a large file. I am using Webdav on a Linux client. I am not sure what is going on.
How large is the file?
Do you mean that you're using the Nextcloud synchronization client?
Yea I'm curious myself, there is a file size limit in PHP and reverse proxy. I can see to increase it.
@poisson said:
I keep getting the error "HTTP connection terminated unexpectedly" after uploading about 200MB of a large file. I am using Webdav on a Linux client. I am not sure what is going on.
How large is the file?
Do you mean that you're using the Nextcloud synchronization client?
I am not. I connected through webdav using my Mint file manager. I did suspect file size might be an issue. This was a zipped 80GB file. It actually doesn't have to be so big, just that for convenience I just zipped everything into one file to store on my computer.
@martijnk Perhaps you can let me know what is the file size limit and I will be sure to keep each file down to that limit.
@poisson said:
I keep getting the error "HTTP connection terminated unexpectedly" after uploading about 200MB of a large file. I am using Webdav on a Linux client. I am not sure what is going on.
How large is the file?
Do you mean that you're using the Nextcloud synchronization client?
I am not. I connected through webdav using my Mint file manager. I did suspect file size might be an issue. This was a zipped 80GB file. It actually doesn't have to be so big, just that for convenience I just zipped everything into one file to store on my computer.
That's a pretty big file.
I'll just point out this link (which is more for the admin who manages Nextcloud):
"A single swap file or partition may be up to 128 MB in size. [...] [I]f you need 256 MB of swap, you can create two 128-MB swap partitions." (M. Welsh & L. Kaufman, Running Linux, 2e, 1996, p. 49)
@allnetstore said:
Uploading 1GB files worked in March. Now rclone returns this:
```
413 Request Entity Too Large
413 Request Entity Too Large
nginx/1.18.0 (Ubuntu)
```
Maybe nginx reverse proxy mis-configured?
Yeah it's a limit in NGINX and PHP. I've upgraded to PHP 8 and the setting wasn't changed.
It's set to 100 GB max now so try again
I managed to upload about 40GB of my 80GB file before it the HTTP connection is terminated. Happened twice, so I now know the current settings probably allows up to 40GB upload successfully. There are probably some other issues involved since the max file size has been changed to 100GB.
WEBDav uploads seem to be failing since yesterday. I have my Synology setup to perform incremental backups and it complains about not being able to find the 'previous file'. Is anyone else experiencing the same issue?
LinuxFreek.com — Thank you for your attention to this matter
@Freek said:
WEBDav uploads seem to be failing since yesterday. I have my Synology setup to perform incremental backups and it complains about not being able to find the 'previous file'. Is anyone else experiencing the same issue?
Same here, internal server error for my setup GoodSync.
I have create ticket for that.
Yeah so apparentley during the upgrade to NC 21 something went wrong and Nextcloud generated new encryption keys.
I do have the old keys, but newly uploaded data after the upgrade was completed is now encrypted with a different set of keys. So I can choose which data to make available, the new or the old one. Right now I've put the old keys back in place since most data is encrypted with those.
People already warned me that with Nextcloud one day or the other your files will become inaccessible with server encryption enabled. Well today seems that day.
Anyway this was still a beta test. So I will sent out an announcement soon and tell people to get their data. I will probably start over without any encryption and never enable it again (and let people encrypt their own files with their own method if they require it).
I have to think hard about this so 'to be continued'. Happy to hear out any ideas/suggestions from the community.
@martijnk said:
Yeah so apparentley during the upgrade to NC 21 something went wrong and Nextcloud generated new encryption keys.
I do have the old keys, but newly uploaded data after the upgrade was completed is now encrypted with a different set of keys. So I can choose which data to make available, the new or the old one. Right now I've put the old keys back in place since most data is encrypted with those.
People already warned me that with Nextcloud one day or the other your files will become inaccessible with server encryption enabled. Well today seems that day.
Anyway this was still a beta test. So I will sent out an announcement soon and tell people to get their data. I will probably start over without any encryption and never enable it again (and let people encrypt their own files with their own method if they require it).
I have to think hard about this so 'to be continued'. Happy to hear out any ideas/suggestions from the community.
No problem at all martijn, indeed, that's why this is a betatest. And I use it purely for backups of backups, so no worries
Thanks for the explanation, appreciate it.
LinuxFreek.com — Thank you for your attention to this matter
martijnk said:
Anyway this was still a beta test. So I will sent out an announcement soon and tell people to get their data.
Let's see how many people forget this is a beta test.
Haha yes we'll see about that indeed but either way no data is lost, it's just a bit of a pain to make it available if somebody would request something they have uploaded in the past few days and don't have a copy at home.
Nextcloud server side encryption doesn't make sense if the Nextcloud application server and the storage are managed by the same entity and located in the same place.
If the administrator wanted or is forced to access the data, they have both the storage and the encryption key.
Server side encryption is useful when the storage is external.
For example, someone could put their Nextcloud application server in the basement, and the storage in a data center.
In this case, the encryption key resides in the basement.
If the data center is raided, files are inaccessible due to lack of encryption key.
We accept Karma donations for the last flan. 🍮 affbrr
@yoursunny said:
Nextcloud server side encryption doesn't make sense if the Nextcloud application server and the storage are managed by the same entity and located in the same place.
If the administrator wanted or is forced to access the data, they have both the storage and the encryption key.
Server side encryption is useful when the storage is external.
For example, someone could put their Nextcloud application server in the basement, and the storage in a data center.
In this case, the encryption key resides in the basement.
If the data center is raided, files are inaccessible due to lack of encryption key.
You are 100% right but it's more that people like the idea that their data is encrypted. But yeah it's a false sense of security indeed.
The end-to-end is kinda nice but buggy as hell and I have a lot of support tickets from users losing keys. So it's probably best to disable any encryption on NC.
Actually a lot of times, the issue is to have encryption at rest, especially for the "casual" users. This sort of protects people from mistakes and human errors (on the providers or others including law enforcement's part). Paranoid folks will encrypt from their end on top of whatever the provider does (don't trust provider).
Of course none of this is "casual" with GDPR regulations...
My 4 self-hosted NC installations are encrypted server-side. As @nullnothere mentions for encryption at rest - when the servers eventually get decommissioned it gives a little peace-of-mind.
I haven't put anything confidential on Novos, so no big loss and I was unlikely to do so anyway.
There's an option to remove legacy encryption in the config file - I (erroneously?) understood that to mean both old & new encryption are available by default. Leaving it on just slows down the server, or so I thought.
@martijnk said: ..a lot of support tickets from users losing keys..
Tough shit - I say. "They were telt"
In stasis until the shitposting stops/abates.
Than=compare;then=sequence:brought=bring;bought=buy:staffs=pile of sticks:informations/infos=no plural. It wisnae me! A big boy done it and ran away. || NVMe2G for life! until death (the end is nigh).
Comments
Grabbed one, thank you.
Interesting service, I'm looking forward on using it. ?
Curious, what's the retention time of the activity logs?
As I managed to accidentally upload some stuff when trying out the Nextcloud Android app as it had auto-upload on by default.
Though, I had deleted the files now but I don't like seeing the filenames in the activity log itself.
Lurker of the LES
Circa 2019
A silent observer, lingering in the shadows.
I believe the default value is 365 days.
Would be great if @martijnk could set it to 30 days, or even less.
I see no point in storing such data for hundreds of users in the database for a long time.
Couldn't resist. Ordered one. Thanks
Jasa Setup VPS
I've set it to 7 days now. Saves me some database space as well
Ordered one! Thanks @martijnk for offering this to the LES community!
Upload speed is really slow... can only get 5-10 Mbps from my Stockholm VPS
Same , @martijnk I'm getting 1-2mbps initially it was 10+
Well speed depends on many factors. I can't tell if it's you or me but I'm not limiting bandwidth nor is the line saturated or the servers overloaded. That's all I can say
Nextcloud 21 is released with a optional component written in Rust. This "High Performance Back-end for Files" should massively decrease response times.
Would that also be rolled out for Brick? I wonder if any differences can be detected for the users if that were deployed!
Normally yes, but I will be carefully rolling out upgrades. I don't want to be the first to be onboard with this and I want to test it first. I will probably deploy it within a couple of weeks. Stability first
Thank you for the Great service @martijnk for some reason uploads are failing a lot today. All good ?
Hi, I haven't heard this from anybody so far. I'm using it myself and I don't have any issues.
No issues here as well. Thanks Martijn!
LinuxFreek.com — Thank you for your attention to this matter
Trying to upload a couple of files with Next cloud android app since yesterday and getting back to back errors.
UPLOAD FAILED - " Could not complete operation. Server unavailable. "
Hi all, updated to Nextcloud 21 and:
I hope E2E won't be an issue, it showed as untested on NC21 but it hardly gets updated. I would recommend against using it unless you really have to.
I'm getting these errors as well here.
With the Android app as well?
Nope, with the Windows Client + Webdav.
Aight that's weird, I will check and try to reproduce.
Can you try this again?
I got it some time ago.
Honesly great offer, I don't really use it as I don't have anything to store but so far with the few pictures I uploaded the service seems solid, and let's say 1 eur for 200 GB lifetime is an amazing deal.
my 2 cents cheer.
Synteq Technical Support, Technical Writer.
Contact me at: +1 (307) 428 8111 or [email protected]
I use NOVOS BRICK to store photos, too.
I figured out Rclone and got it running on my home router (MIPS, 128MB RAM, 2TB external HDD).
When I have new photos in the HDD, I run the
rclone synccommand.Upload speed doesn't matter, because it's a one-way backup use case, not multi-device sync.
I have uploaded 90GB so far, and nothing has been lost.
Web UI is slower than my private Nextcloud, because there are so many useless apps.
I disabled most of them in apporder and it gets better.
We accept Karma donations for the last flan. 🍮 affbrr
it's very useable now and I can download at a good speed. just need to find out what I should store on there.
I bench YABS 24/7/365 unless it's a leap year.
I keep getting the error "HTTP connection terminated unexpectedly" after uploading about 200MB of a large file. I am using Webdav on a Linux client. I am not sure what is going on.
Deals and Reviews: LowEndBoxes Review | Avoid dodgy providers with The LEBRE Whitelist | Free hosting (with conditions): Evolution-Host, NanoKVM, FreeMach, ServedEZ | Get expert copyediting and copywriting help at The Write Flow
How large is the file?
Do you mean that you're using the Nextcloud synchronization client?
"A single swap file or partition may be up to 128 MB in size. [...] [I]f you need 256 MB of swap, you can create two 128-MB swap partitions." (M. Welsh & L. Kaufman, Running Linux, 2e, 1996, p. 49)
Yea I'm curious myself, there is a file size limit in PHP and reverse proxy. I can see to increase it.
I am not. I connected through webdav using my Mint file manager. I did suspect file size might be an issue. This was a zipped 80GB file. It actually doesn't have to be so big, just that for convenience I just zipped everything into one file to store on my computer.
@martijnk Perhaps you can let me know what is the file size limit and I will be sure to keep each file down to that limit.
Deals and Reviews: LowEndBoxes Review | Avoid dodgy providers with The LEBRE Whitelist | Free hosting (with conditions): Evolution-Host, NanoKVM, FreeMach, ServedEZ | Get expert copyediting and copywriting help at The Write Flow
Uploading 1GB files worked in March. Now rclone returns this:
Maybe nginx reverse proxy mis-configured?
Koofr Cloud Storage: Lifetime Subscription (1TB) for $119.99 with coupon KOOFR40 [aff link]
That's a pretty big file.
I'll just point out this link (which is more for the admin who manages Nextcloud):
https://docs.nextcloud.com/server/latest/admin_manual/configuration_files/big_file_upload_configuration.html
"A single swap file or partition may be up to 128 MB in size. [...] [I]f you need 256 MB of swap, you can create two 128-MB swap partitions." (M. Welsh & L. Kaufman, Running Linux, 2e, 1996, p. 49)
413 Request Entity Too Large
Yeah it's a limit in NGINX and PHP. I've upgraded to PHP 8 and the setting wasn't changed.
It's set to 100 GB max now so try again
413 Request Entity Too Large
I managed to upload about 40GB of my 80GB file before it the HTTP connection is terminated. Happened twice, so I now know the current settings probably allows up to 40GB upload successfully. There are probably some other issues involved since the max file size has been changed to 100GB.
Deals and Reviews: LowEndBoxes Review | Avoid dodgy providers with The LEBRE Whitelist | Free hosting (with conditions): Evolution-Host, NanoKVM, FreeMach, ServedEZ | Get expert copyediting and copywriting help at The Write Flow
The notes seems broken
Action and Reaction in history
All stored files with space when synced / copied using rclone is automatically has single quote on their name.
Is this server related feature/problem?
https://microlxc.net/
413 Request Entity Too Large
Hi @martijnk
I tried to upload 5GB file and still get error :
413 Request Entity Too Large
Nginx 1.18
https://microlxc.net/
WEBDav uploads seem to be failing since yesterday. I have my Synology setup to perform incremental backups and it complains about not being able to find the 'previous file'. Is anyone else experiencing the same issue?
LinuxFreek.com — Thank you for your attention to this matter
Same here, internal server error for my setup GoodSync.
I have create ticket for that.
Anyone open to sharing their rclone config? I haven't set up rclone before and could use an example.
Yeah so apparentley during the upgrade to NC 21 something went wrong and Nextcloud generated new encryption keys.
I do have the old keys, but newly uploaded data after the upgrade was completed is now encrypted with a different set of keys. So I can choose which data to make available, the new or the old one. Right now I've put the old keys back in place since most data is encrypted with those.
People already warned me that with Nextcloud one day or the other your files will become inaccessible with server encryption enabled. Well today seems that day.
Anyway this was still a beta test. So I will sent out an announcement soon and tell people to get their data. I will probably start over without any encryption and never enable it again (and let people encrypt their own files with their own method if they require it).
I have to think hard about this so 'to be continued'. Happy to hear out any ideas/suggestions from the community.
No problem at all martijn, indeed, that's why this is a betatest. And I use it purely for backups of backups, so no worries
Thanks for the explanation, appreciate it.
LinuxFreek.com — Thank you for your attention to this matter
Let's see how many people forget this is a beta test.
"Losing Millions!"
HetrixTools - Highly recommended uptime monitor [aff]
Haha yes we'll see about that indeed but either way no data is lost, it's just a bit of a pain to make it available if somebody would request something they have uploaded in the past few days and don't have a copy at home.
Nextcloud server side encryption doesn't make sense if the Nextcloud application server and the storage are managed by the same entity and located in the same place.
If the administrator wanted or is forced to access the data, they have both the storage and the encryption key.
Server side encryption is useful when the storage is external.
For example, someone could put their Nextcloud application server in the basement, and the storage in a data center.
In this case, the encryption key resides in the basement.
If the data center is raided, files are inaccessible due to lack of encryption key.
We accept Karma donations for the last flan. 🍮 affbrr
You are 100% right but it's more that people like the idea that their data is encrypted. But yeah it's a false sense of security indeed.
The end-to-end is kinda nice but buggy as hell and I have a lot of support tickets from users losing keys. So it's probably best to disable any encryption on NC.
Actually a lot of times, the issue is to have encryption at rest, especially for the "casual" users. This sort of protects people from mistakes and human errors (on the providers or others including law enforcement's part). Paranoid folks will encrypt from their end on top of whatever the provider does (don't trust provider).
Of course none of this is "casual" with GDPR regulations...
My 4 self-hosted NC installations are encrypted server-side. As @nullnothere mentions for encryption at rest - when the servers eventually get decommissioned it gives a little peace-of-mind.
I haven't put anything confidential on Novos, so no big loss and I was unlikely to do so anyway.
There's an option to remove legacy encryption in the config file - I (erroneously?) understood that to mean both old & new encryption are available by default. Leaving it on just slows down the server, or so I thought.
Tough shit - I say. "They were telt"
In stasis until the shitposting stops/abates.
Than=compare;then=sequence:brought=bring;bought=buy:staffs=pile of sticks:informations/infos=no plural.
It wisnae me! A big boy done it and ran away. || NVMe2G for life! until death (the end is nigh).
The past 2 days I'm having issues again with backing up my files over WebDAV. Is anyone else experiencing issues as well?
LinuxFreek.com — Thank you for your attention to this matter
Hello, I also have issues with webdav for a couple of days. Here are some logs from synology hyperbackup:
2021-05-04T03:01:16+02:00 xyz img_backup: [28716]img_backup.cpp:1765 Action: [local backup], Repo Path: [/volume1/@img_bkp_cache/webdav__backups_.qHxEEg], LinkKey: [xyz_0011323756D4_4], Cloud backup: [1], Target ID: [xyz-backup.hbk], task ID: [4]
2021-05-04T03:01:16+02:00 xyz img_backup: [28716]img_backup.cpp:1767 app config Path: [/volume1/@tmp/BKP_APP_EBOZUY]
2021-05-04T03:09:08+02:00 xyz img_backup: (28716) progress_backup.cpp:50 AddTotal [6940304812]
2021-05-04T03:09:13+02:00 xyz img_worker: [28991]tag_db.cpp:1103 info: last version tag db [/volume1/@img_bkp_cache/ClientCache_cloud_image_webdav.ryblkd/last_version_tagdb] not exists [No such file or directory]
2021-05-04T03:09:16+02:00 xyz img_backup: (28716) backup_controller.cpp:3556 [BkpCtrl] All workers flush done, continue:(1)
2021-05-04T03:17:32+02:00 xyz img_worker: webdav-protocol.cpp(652): Curl error with code = '52' and msg = 'Empty reply from server'
2021-05-04T03:17:32+02:00 xyz img_worker: webdav-protocol.cpp(162): Failed to upload file, msg = 'Empty reply from server'
2021-05-04T03:17:32+02:00 xyz img_worker: transfer_webdav.cpp:235 need retry #0: send_file failed: -9900, Empty reply from server
2021-05-04T03:17:39+02:00 xyz img_worker: webdav-protocol.cpp(168): Server error: status='404', msg = 'File not found'
2021-05-04T03:17:39+02:00 xyz img_worker: (28813) file_transfer.cpp:780 failed to sendfile to [xyz-backup.hbk/Pool/0/0/0.bucket.2] from [/volume1/@img_bkp_cache/webdav__backups_.qHxEEg/xyz-backup.hbk/Pool/0/0/0.bucket], data_hot=[0], error = [2003]
2021-05-04T03:17:39+02:00 xyz img_worker: (28813) file_transfer.cpp:629 failed to sendfile: trg_relative path: [Pool/0/0/0.bucket], err: [2003]
2021-05-04T03:17:39+02:00 xyz img_worker: (28813) cloud_upload_controller.cpp:2141 failed to sync upload file [Pool/0/0/0.bucket], ret[2]
2021-05-04T03:17:39+02:00 xyz img_worker: (28813) cloud_upload_controller.cpp:2269 failed to upload file: [/volume1/@img_bkp_cache/webdav__backups_.qHxEEg/xyz-backup.hbk/Pool/0/0/0.bucket] --> [xyz-backup.hbk/Pool/0/0/0.bucket], blRemoveAfterUpload: [1], dataClass: [2]
2021-05-04T03:17:39+02:00 xyz img_worker: (28813) cloud_upload_controller.cpp:1934 failed to do the job
2021-05-04T03:17:40+02:00 xyz img_backup: (28716) backup_controller.cpp:3582 recieve notify error from cloud uploader, err[ST_NOT_FOUND], resume status[NOT_RESUMABLE]
2021-05-04T03:17:40+02:00 xyz img_backup: (28716) backup_controller.cpp:3693 INFO: abnormal terminate: blWorkerAlive[1], blWaitCloudUploaderEndResponse[0], blWaitBackupEnd:[0]
2021-05-04T03:17:40+02:00 xyz img_worker: (28991) client_base.cpp:125 [BkpCtrl] Got TERM signal: (15)
2021-05-04T03:17:40+02:00 xyz img_backup: (28716) backup_controller.cpp:774 Something wrong happen during traversing
2021-05-04T03:17:40+02:00 xyz img_backup: (28716) backup_controller.cpp:1094 failed to do schedule
2021-05-04T03:17:40+02:00 xyz img_backup: (28716) backup_controller.cpp:479 failed to do dispatch [./xyz/xyz.jpg]
2021-05-04T03:17:40+02:00 xyz img_backup: (28716) backup_controller.cpp:2067 [BkpCtrl] nftw() failed to traverse: ret = [1]
2021-05-04T03:17:40+02:00 xyz img_backup: (28716) backup_controller.cpp:2118 failed to traverse path
2021-05-04T03:17:40+02:00 xyz img_backup: (28716) backup_controller.cpp:2575 failed to traverse: errno=(2)
2021-05-04T03:17:40+02:00 xyz img_backup: (28716) backup_controller.cpp:2966 failed to backup data
2021-05-04T03:17:40+02:00 xyz img_backup: (28716) backup_controller.cpp:3693 INFO: abnormal terminate: blWorkerAlive[1], blWaitCloudUploaderEndResponse[0], blWaitBackupEnd:[0]
2021-05-04T03:17:41+02:00 xyz img_backup: (28716) backup_controller.cpp:3445 Error: worker[28991] failed, result[ST_SUSPEND], resume_status: [RESUMABLE]
2021-05-04T03:17:41+02:00 xyz img_backup: (28716) backup_controller.cpp:3693 INFO: abnormal terminate: blWorkerAlive[0], blWaitCloudUploaderEndResponse[0], blWaitBackupEnd:[0]
2021-05-04T03:17:41+02:00 xyz img_backup: (28716) local_backup_controller.cpp:593 [BkpCtrl] Failed to backup, version_status: [2]
2021-05-04T03:17:41+02:00 xyz img_backup: (28716) local_backup_controller.cpp:64 [BkpCtrl] error occurs: blRet[1], err(ST_NOT_FOUND)
2021-05-04T03:17:41+02:00 xyz img_worker: (28813) cloud_upload_controller.cpp:3417 [CloudUpload] caller occurs err[ST_NOT_FOUND], skip doing [CMD_END], is controller complete version [1]
2021-05-04T03:17:43+02:00 xyz img_worker: (28813) cloud_upload_controller.cpp:1178 cloud uploader is finished and is waiting for die, skip doing anything: blNotify:[0], blResponseEnd:[0], blPostCloud:[1]
2021-05-04T03:17:43+02:00 xyz img_backup: (28716) [err] logger.cpp:2810 last backup errcode [2200]
2021-05-04T03:17:43+02:00 xyz img_backup: (28716) service_wrapper.cpp:79 failed to start backup service
2021-05-04T03:17:43+02:00 xyz img_backup: [28716]img_backup.cpp:1877 Failed to start backup task errno:2
2021-05-04T03:17:43+02:00 xyz img_backup: [28716]img_backup.cpp:2446 failed to start task
2021-05-04T03:17:44+02:00 xyz img_backup: (28716) [err] backup_progress.cpp:463 Backup task [novos] completes with result [3] and errorcode [2200]. Time spent: [1059 sec].
I will check this. Btw it might be better to open a ticket next time. I'm not monitoring this site