Comment on Getting Started with Proxmox
anamethatisnt@sopuli.xyz 6 days agoI prefer running true vms too, but it is resource intensive.
Playing with lxcs and docker could allow one to run more services on a little beelink.
Comment on Getting Started with Proxmox
anamethatisnt@sopuli.xyz 6 days agoI prefer running true vms too, but it is resource intensive.
Playing with lxcs and docker could allow one to run more services on a little beelink.
jubilationtcornpone@sh.itjust.works 6 days ago
Yeah, with something that size you’re pretty much limited to containers.
lucas@startrek.website 5 days ago
Am I looking at the wrong device? Beelink EQ15 looks like it has an N150 and looks like 16GB of ram? That’s plenty for quite few VMs. I run an N100 minipc with only 8GB of RAM and about half a dozen VMs and a similar number of LXC containers. As long as you’re careful about only provisioning what each VM actually needs, it can be plenty.
jubilationtcornpone@sh.itjust.works 5 days ago
In this situation it’s not necessarily that it’s the “right” or “wrong” device. The better question is, “does it meet your needs?” There are pros and cons to running each service in its own VM. One of the cons is the overhead consumed by the VM OS. Sometimes that’s a necessary sacrifice.
Some of the advantages of running a system like Proxmox are that it’s easily scalable and you’re not locked into specific hardware. If your current Beelink doesn’t prove to be enough, you can just add another one to the cluster or add a different host and Proxmox doesn’t care what it is.
TLDR: it’s adequate until it’s not. When it’s not, it’s an easy fix.
lucas@startrek.website 5 days ago
Absolutely. I actually have an upgrade already planned, but it’s just that it’s not because I can’t run VMs, it’s more that I want to run more hungry services than will fit on those resources, whatever virtualisation layers were being used. The fact that it’s an easy fix to more a VM/lxc to a new host is absolutely it, though.