A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.
Rules:
Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.
No spam posting.
Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.
Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.
Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).
No trolling.
Resources:
Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.
Questions? DM the mods!
I personally think of a small DIY rack stuffed with commodity HDDs off Ebay with an LVM spanned across a bunch of RAID1s. I don't want any complex architectural solutions since my homelab's scale always equals 1. To my current understanding this has little to no obvious drawbacks. What do you think?
Hot take: For personal use, I see no value at all in "availability," only data preservation. If a drive fails catastrophically and I lose a day waiting for a restore from backups, no one is going to fire me. No one is going to be held up in their job. It's not enterprise.
However, redundancy doesn't save you when a file is deleted, corrupted, ransom-wared or whatever. Your raid mirror will just copy the problem instantly. Snapshots and 3,2,1 backups are what are important to me because when personal data is lost, it's lost forever.
I really do think a lot of hobbyists need to focus less on highly available redundancy and more on real backups. Both time and money are better spent on that.
Agreed. RAID is useless. Your drives will never fail before you'd want to replace them with larger ones anyway.
That's true until it isn't.
Unrecoverable hard drive failures definitely occur, even early on in the life cycle of a drive. I like having a RAID-5 array ... but then again, I don't really have any other backups (which I really should fix).
What I really need is an ISP that doesn't have a 1.2TB data cap.
no what you really need is backups, isn't it? having an external hdd that you're backing up to is a lot better against data loss than putting that same drive into any kind of raid. (because now you truly have a copy, while in a raid it's still a single point of failure)
I can feel your pain on the ISP part though. (Haven't looked into this, but sounds like a zfs-job) Just saying that backups doesn't have to be offsite, but they do need to be separate from the original data medium. Going offsite is an important early step, but getting it on separate storage is the first step.
If anything, I would argue that especially in a homelab, the risk of misconfigurations or by mistakes when tinkering can increase by using raid. If you've have a couple of years of experience with raid and do not see my above argument, then please share your experiences.
I am sorry for this wall of text, your comment caught my eye while thinking about something else, tl;dr: raid is not a backup