Personally I like to keep my data on a separate system because it helps me keep it stable and secure compared to my more “fun” servers.
That said, being able to run compute on the same server as storage removes a bit of hassle.
Comment on NAS vs larger server
dan@upvote.au 1 year agoThanks for the input. Would you recommend having a separate NAS system, or replacing my current server with it?
KeepFlying@lemmy.world 1 year ago
greyscale@lemmy.sdf.org 1 year ago
Run your fun things in containers and you can’t make a mess of the host.
greyscale@lemmy.sdf.org 1 year ago
I’d consolidate to let it pay for itself over the longer term in electricity savings.
My single NAS runs everything I could ever want, though I regret not finding a used 6700k, finding out teh 6600k didn’t have HT.
Also, I run frigate on it inside a container and use a Google Coral Accellerator to people-detection from 4x2k camera streams. Its pretty swish, though it took some fiddling to get the kernel to be groovy with it and do container-device passthru from PCI-e.
In total, my single NAS runs the following in containers:
The whole shebang, NAS, UPS, ISP Modem and Ubiquity Dream Machine run ~100W.
dan@upvote.au 1 year ago
Are you running something like Unraid or TrueNAS, or are you just running a ‘regular’ Linux distro?
I’m doing something similar, except using Blue Iris and CodeProject.AI instead of Frigate. Works pretty well! CodeProject AI just added Coral support recently.
greyscale@lemmy.sdf.org 1 year ago
the NAS is the bulk of the 100W.
Ubuntu + ZFS. I don’t see the appeal of running a non-mainline distribution. All I did was set it up so ZFS sends me emails and a crontab to run a ZFS resilver weekly.