I saw this post today on Reddit and was curious to see if views are similar here as they are there.

  1. What are the best benefits of self-hosting?
  2. What do you wish you would have known as a beginner starting out?
  3. What resources do you know of to help a non-computer-scientist/engineer get started in self-hosting?
  • Eximius@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    btrfs with its send/receive (incremental fs-level backups) is already stable enough for mostly everything (just has some issues with raid 5/6), and is much more performant than zfs. And it is also in the linux kernel tree (quite hugely useful). Of course, if more zfs-like functionality is what you look for.

    • schizo@forum.uncomfortable.business
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      Honestly it’s not; BTRFS has been in my ‘that’s neat, but it’s still got a non-zero chance of deciding to light everything on fire because it’s bored’ list for, uh, a decade now?

      The NAS build is old enough to more or less predate BTRFS being usable (closing in on a decade since I did the initial OS install, jeez) and none of the features matter for what I’m storing: if every drive in my NAS died today, I’d be very annoyed for a couple of hours during the rebuild, and would lose terrabytes of linux ISOs that I can just download again, if I wanted to use Jellyfin to install them a 2nd time. (Any data I care about is pulled offsite at least once a day, so I’ve got pretty comprehensive backups minus the ISOs.)

      I know EXT4 and mergerfs and snapraid are not cool, or have shiny features, but I’ve also had zero problems with them over the last decade, even between Ubuntu upgrades (16.04, 18.04, 20.04, 22.04) and hardware platform upgrades (6600k, 8700k, 10950k) and the entire replacement of all the system drives (hdd -> ssd -> nvme) and the expansion of and replacement of dead HDDs, of varying sizes (4tb drives to 8tb drives to 16tb drives to some 20tb drives).

      It all just… worked, and at no point was I concerned about the filesystem not working if I replaced or upgraded or changed something, which is not something ZFS or BTRFS would have guaranteed during that same time window.

    • blackstrat@lemmy.fwgx.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      “Already stable enough”

      1. no it isn’t.
      2. if fucking should be, it’s been around 15 years!
      • thomasloven@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        And I’ve been using it for eight six of those 15 in RAID 5/6 with zero issues, so YMMW I guess. Sorry you experienced problems.

    • lemmyvore@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      IMHO 99% of the time btrfs features are used as a band-aid for things that would be much better done otherwise. Generally by using a stable distro and a decent backup solution (like Debian + Borg). And you get to use a truly stable, proven, boring fs ike ext4 or xfs.

      • Eximius@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 months ago

        Stable yes, but no protection from bitrot, and the journal of ext4 is the band aid, instead of a cow fs like zfs or btrfs.

        • lemmyvore@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          You can protect important data with backups, which you should do anyway, and in practice I feel like the added complexity of BTRFS and ZFS is not worth the COW.

          BTRFS is cool but they tried to cram way too much too fast into it and it added a ton of complexity and it’s still not 100% done after all these years. A COW mode for ext4 would have been adopted much faster.