Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Self hosted FLOSS fitness/workout tracker

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 123 posts

Re: Self hosted FLOSS fitness/workout tracker

#101

Post by jasongi »

satvikpendem wrote: post #65
jasongi wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that self hosted apps are rarely designed to be run serverless (why would they be?) and giving each app it’a own VPS or hosted container is going to price out the self-hosted crowd, to the point where you might as well be paying for some cloud software. In particular, self hosted apps usually are using relational databases or SQLite which need persistent disk so can’t run serverless. They also sometime…

Why would you use a new VPS for each application? Just dockerize and put all your apps on one VPS, which is what most self-hosters do.

Because that’s not one-click setup or priced per request, which was the comment I was responding to was seeking.

And I did say at the end of my comment:

> Thing is, almost every self hosted app supports docker now and so if you like, install portainer on a VPS or NUC or raspberry pi and you’ll be able to set up most self hosted apps easily without touching the command line.

Re: Self hosted FLOSS fitness/workout tracker

#102

Post by jasongi »

diggan wrote: post #58
jasongi wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that self hosted apps are rarely designed to be run serverless (why would they be?) and giving each app it’a own VPS or hosted container is going to price out the self-hosted crowd, to the point where you might as well be paying for some cloud software. In particular, self hosted apps usually are using relational databases or SQLite which need persistent disk so can’t run serverless. They also sometime…

> and giving each app it’a own VPS or hosted container is going to price out the self-hosted crowd, As far as I know, myself and other self-hosters run these sort of applications/services on home infrastructure or VPSes/dedicated/bare-metal where multiple applications usually share one instance. This could be done with docker, or cgroups, or countless other ways. I'm not sure if that's what you mean with a "hosted co…

Yes. But that is not what OP comment is asking for. They want one-click. And request based pricing. I was explaining why request based pricing is infeasible and one-click install would price people out (because it would imply a VPS per service).

And I said the same thing at the end of my comment about the way people would host things using docker on a VPS or home server.

> Thing is, almost every self hosted app supports docker now and so if you like, install portainer on a VPS or NUC or raspberry pi and you’ll be able to set up most self hosted apps easily without touching the command line.

Re: Self hosted FLOSS fitness/workout tracker

#103

Post by ants_everywhere »

ashu1461 wrote: post #77
satvikpendem wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed, this should be local first software [0], not self-hosted but server required. [0] localfirstweb.dev

Generally firebase / supabase do a very good job of providing client sdks to access database directly without the need of a server. That way your data is still in cloud and you don't actually need a server.

Supabase and firebase are servers.

In fact if something is "in the cloud", it's by definition being made available by a remote machine, AKA a server serving the data.

The alternative is not to have a server and instead have clients share data if data needs to be shared.

Re: Self hosted FLOSS fitness/workout tracker

#104

Post by ncrmro »

diggan wrote: post #56
ncrmro wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are now backed by docker after the Electric Eel update.

Had to look it up, you're talking about TrueNAS moving from Kubernetes to Docker, just for clarification, https://forums.truenas.com/t/the-future-of-electric-eel-and-... Huh, interesting as I literally moved from TrueNAS to NixOS because of two reasons 1) not liking something as complicated as Kubernetes for something as simple as home infrastructure and 2) to have a more reproducible setup. Happy to hear 1 won't be…

I feel that, I went back to truenas for the simplicity.

This 5 disk pool started from the freebsd truenas, to Debian, to nixos, back to linux truenas.

And the disks where bumped from 2TB to 12Tb

Re: Self hosted FLOSS fitness/workout tracker

#105

Post by nunez »

AiAi wrote: post #47

I tried to use it but I found the UI/UX confusing, with many exercises lacking images too. I support the idea but the workflow was not for me. I settled with Iron for iOS, which is also free software despite the platform it runs. Still looking for an equivalent on Android, the LiftLog app seems to have potential, but I think the UI is not that great.

I've been lifting for ten years thereabouts. Used JEFIT, Hevy, and Strong throughout that time.

I've given up on apps completely and log with a reMarkable.

All of these apps use their own data schemas, which makes normalizing the data for export into something like Google Sheets really hard. Consequently, you're locked into those apps and whatever design choices they choose to implement.

Moreover, I don't like using my phone when I'm at the gym, and, well, they're phone apps.

Re: Self hosted FLOSS fitness/workout tracker

#108

Post by ashu1461 »

ants_everywhere wrote: post #103
ashu1461 wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Generally firebase / supabase do a very good job of providing client sdks to access database directly without the need of a server. That way your data is still in cloud and you don't actually need a server.

Supabase and firebase are servers. In fact if something is "in the cloud", it's by definition being made available by a remote machine, AKA a server serving the data. The alternative is not to have a server and instead have clients share data if data needs to be shared.

True, one of the pointers in the comments was that people don't want to host their own servers so was suggesting an alternative to that.

Re: Self hosted FLOSS fitness/workout tracker

#109

Post by walrus01 »

neilv wrote: post #40

This app seems to require a server. Invoke the app, and it presents a login screen, with links to "register" and to "use custom server". I suppose an alternative design would be to be on-device storage first, and then have an optional sync to a server (or laptop/desktop).

Yes, that's what "Self hosted" means, you install it on your own server. Your choice if it's something "cloud" based and remote from you, or resides in your home.

https://wger.readthedocs.io/en/latest/installation.html

Re: Self hosted FLOSS fitness/workout tracker

#110

Post by globular-toast »

ashu1461 wrote: post #77
satvikpendem wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed, this should be local first software [0], not self-hosted but server required. [0] localfirstweb.dev

Generally firebase / supabase do a very good job of providing client sdks to access database directly without the need of a server. That way your data is still in cloud and you don't actually need a server.

That's even worse. The whole point of things like this are you do all your computing with your own computer(s). People in this thread are just saying that it would be even better if you could only use your phone/laptop etc and didn't have to also set up your own server.
Post reply on HN