leaden anchor
Hello
I'm not entirely sure about this or what happened, but with the beta version, I was able to configure AWS S3 remote storage using the MinIO service.
However, when I updated to the final version on my production system, I saw that this service was no longer mentioned in the integration documentation, and it wouldn't let me integrate my private remote storage system.
Am I doing something wrong, or is this how it works?
Thank you.
carmine trellis
Hello
I'm not entirely sure about this or what happened, but with the beta vers...
the integration was changed from S3 to AWS_S3 during BETA.
the reason for this is that S3 is NOT an open standard. and all the various "S3 compatible" providers actually are slightly different and are not entirely compatible.
this resulted in needing work arounds inside the integration for it to work with other providers and it started to become a mess. therefore it got change to AWS only.
HOWEVER this does not been that the door is closed to other providers. in the future other integrations will likely appear that are directly designed to work with the specific providers s3 setup using the feature set that they actually implement.
so the short version is that: no you are not doing anything wrong its just not compatible at this time
depending on which beta version you had installed it may have worked for you at that time. it underwent quite a few things between the beta versions
sand magnet
I too was looking forward to using Backblaze as a backup option. Very unfortunate as I don't think the integration uses some special features which are only present in Amazon S3?
bold oriole
I too was looking forward to using Backblaze as a backup option. Very unfortunat...
Not at this moment no
sand magnet
So the limitation was added as an arbitrary precaution? Could we add a checkbox "I know this isn't AWS, let me continue anyway"? 😆
carmine trellis
So the limitation was added as an arbitrary precaution? Could we add a checkbox ...
stuff breaks
this happened during beta to help compatibility
https://github.com/home-assistant/core/pull/144092
then this when decision was made to switch to aws only
https://github.com/home-assistant/core/pull/144318
bold oriole
I mean it would break the moment we would add those features
So we rather break this upfront than to break you during an update
Like, that's not the user experience we want to provide
sand magnet
stuff breaks
this happened during beta to help compatibility
https://github.com...
ah thanks for those, I was looking for a specific reason all I could find with blame was the simple 'rename to aws' but no reasoning
carmine trellis
to be fair, i imagine now that there is a base s3 integration. I suspect people will use it as a starting point to create stuff for other providers.
sand magnet
true, it's a good starting point! maybe i'll have a tinker...
in a similar vein, was there a discussion at some point to relay backups to an external process by using something like Restic? which would remove all transfer logic and more to that tool and only a config gui would be needed in HA
bold oriole
Never heard of it
sand magnet
similar to Borg https://restic.net/
leaden anchor
Okay, that's a shame, but if I have to choose between a stable system and MinIO, I'd go with the former 🙂
Thank you so much for your work.