Submitted 1 year ago by reddit_sux@lemmy.world to selfhosted@lemmy.world
I have an old x86_64 computer which I am planning to use as a NAS. Which of the 2 is a better option? Is it helpful or better to run on bare metal or as a VM on proxmox?
I’ve had a little OMV VM running on Proxmox for about 4 years with no issues at all.
What benefits to running it as an VM rather than on bare metal.
For me just the convenience of having everything in one box. Simplifies networking too. I run home assistant, openwrt, OMV, an ubuntu dtop VM and a wordpress LXC on a little m93 I jacked up with 32Gb RAM. Backups are dead simple and it’s all on one little UPS.
Some might prefer metal for other reasons but simplicity and convenience are priorities for me, at least in my homelab.
The rules now are generally: bare metal if that’s all the box will do, or it’s main task, container if it’s one of many services, vm if it’s a larger application you might migrate and i/o isn’t your limitation.
The line between container and vm is fuzzy, but bare metal means you’re making a design choice for that machine and if that or another application breaks the machine you’re screwed.
In a way freebsd is amazing for this, you put all applications in jails and don’t use the main userspace much, but the virtualiztion story isn’t quite there yet.
I verry much like OMV, simply because i could use it with knowledge i already have.
I’ts a Debian system -> I understand that I’t uses normal RAID and ext4 -> I understand that (Plus, if things go wrong, I can just pop the drives back into any other computer and use it without much fuss) It has a rSnapshot plug in -> I already used that in the past.
Sure I’m missing out on fancy stuff like BTRFS / ZFS, but i can live with that.
TrueNAS Scale is also Debian and uses standard ZFS for drive management. However I’m not a fan of the TrueNAS webUI, it feels overly complex and stuff can be hard to find.
Lvm can get you 80% of the way to basic zfs. I’m a bit similar, old school Unix who likes debian because it makes sense, but storage is one of my dominating constraints so zfs is mandatory (even if I hate stuff like the way the arc works by default).
I don’t use any of those, just NFS on a VM. The other stuff can be helpful, but I want better security, and that requires fewer packages.
I have tried TrueNAS and thought it was great.
I was doing that but I have a Windows PC on the network and have fucked up Samba too many times to be confident to do it again.
I’m confident you could fuck it up again if you tried ;)
I have tried few of them but I highly recommend you to try UNRAID. It will introduce you to world of docker containers
I run UnRAID myself as well. I don’t need raw performance, just stupid amounts of storage for my data hoard, and being able to slap in whatever disk has the best $:gb whenever I need to expand has been such a nice change.
I do have a SSD pool to run my containers and separate one for drive caching as well.
OMV with SnapRaid+MergerFS in a Proxmox VM. I used an LSI card with PCI passthrough to the VM so it could see the drives. Nightly snapshots of the VMs are very convenient if you ever need to restore/migrate your install.
That’s a lot to learn.
Things are easy or free. Rarely both. :) it’s well worth learning OMV. If you have any questions I’ll try to help!
Having faced the same situation, here's my 2 cents:
In the end, OMV won it out for me, the 10TB motley crew of various HDD-s has served me well and I can expand cheaply when my needs grow.
TBi@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I run OMV baremetal for last few years. I really like it. I did try TrueNAS and found it too convoluted.
Nextcloud is a totally different beast that would run on top of either.
OMV allows you to use ZFS as well if you want (I do) but also the flexibility to use other raid systems.
I just wish they’d left in portainer as default. No point reinventing the docker wheel…
iHUNTcriminals@lemm.ee 1 year ago
Yeah I liked how docker was before the compose update.