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

My Homelab Setup

bryananthonio.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 232 posts

Re: My Homelab Setup

#181

Post by nickorlow »

benlivengood wrote: post #120
nickorlow wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have had issues w/ doing k8s over residential wan once I had enough hosts in my cluster (though they were halfway across the US from each other, and not town)

So far everything is under 15ms apart, but it is a small number of nodes so far. Did you mostly have trouble with etcd?

Yeah, etcd was the main culprit, but latency was 150-300ms in my case. At 3 nodes, it was relatively stable (had an issue every week or so that lasted < 5 min), but at 4 the camel's back broke.

Re: My Homelab Setup

#183

Post by bluedino »

polairscience wrote: post #59

A lot of people are talking about their backup storage solutions in here, but it's mostly about corporate cloud providers. I'm curious if anyone is going more rogue with their solution and using off-prem storage at a friend's house. Which is to say, hardware is cheap, software is open, and privacy is very hard to come by. Thus I've been thinking I'd like to not use cloud providers and just keep a duplicate system at…

> I'm curious if anyone is going more rogue with their solution and using off-prem storage at a friend's house.

Have been doing this for 25 years.

If you have asymmetrical connections it's easiest to do the initial backup locally and then take your drive(s) to your friends house and then just sync/update.

Re: My Homelab Setup

#184

Post by reddalo »

bluehatbrit wrote: post #87
reddalo wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Me too, I highly recommend Hetzner Storage Box. It's cheap, and it works great (unlike their S3-compatible storage, which has been a huge fiasco since they launched it).

Could you elaborate on the issues with their S3 compatible storage? I've been considering it and haven't seen too many issues in my testing, beyond the lack of identity control.

If you look at the Hetzner status page, you'll always see their status about degraded performance for Object Storage: https://status.hetzner.com/

The main problem is that it sometimes slows down to a crawl, or requests fail altogether.

Re: My Homelab Setup

#185

Post by arvid-lind »

miloschwartz wrote: post #108
QGQBGdeZREunxLe wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tunnels go through Cloudflare infrastructure so are subject to bandwidth limits (100MB upload). Streaming Plex over a tunnel is against their ToS.

Pangolin is a good solution to this because you can optionally self-host it which means you aren't limited by Cloudflare's TOS / limits.

Another vote for Pangolin! Been using it for a month or so to replace my Cloudflare tunnels and it's been perfect.

Re: My Homelab Setup

#186

Post by succo »

For remote acces I use NetBird, I think is the best and secure option to not expose stuff directly on the web and put all your resources under a vpn. Is super easy to setup and it supports also sso with 2fa

Re: My Homelab Setup

#187

Post by Havoc »

xandrius wrote: post #55

One thing to consider before doing the same, a computer done for homelab has a much lower consumption. The setup mentioned in the article has an avg 600 kWh/year as opposed to a pretty solid HP EliteDesk (my own homelab) which uses 100 kWh/year. Sure you don't get a GPU but for what it is used for, you might as well use a laptop for that.

Minipcs are nice but they’re not really like for like comparable.

A good AM4 board can do 7 nvme, 8 sata and ecc ram.

Re: My Homelab Setup

#188

Post by hombre_fatal »

shiroiuma wrote: post #147
decryption wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

16GB would be plenty. I've got like a dozen services running on an 8GB i7-4970 and it's only using 5GB of RAM right now.

If you're running ZFS, it's advisable to use more RAM. ZFS is a RAM hog. I'm using 32GB on my home server.

That + full-disk encryption is why I went with BTRFS inside LUKS for my NAS.

They recommend 1GB RAM per 1TB storage for ZFS. Maybe they mean redundant storage, so even 2x16TB should use 16GB RAM? But it's painful enough building a NAS server when HDD prices have gone up so much lately.

The total price tag already feels like you're about to build another gaming PC rather than just a place to back up your machines and serve some videos. -_-

That said, you sure need to be educated on BTRFS to use it in fail scenarios like degraded mode. If ZFS has a better UX around that, maybe it's a better choice for most people.

Re: My Homelab Setup

#189

Post by matja »

leptons wrote: post #125
TacticalCoder wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Impressive that all that can run on one machine. Mind sharing the specs? Not GP but I have lots of fun running VMs and lots of containers on an old HP Z440 workstation from 2014 or so. This thing has 64 GB of ECC RAM and costs next to nothing (a bit more now with RAM that went up). Thing is: it doesn't need to be on 24/7. I only power it up when I first need it during the day. 14 cores Xeon for lots of fun. Only th…

Cheap to buy old hardware, but electricity to run those old rigs isn't really cheap in many areas now. My server is costing me about $100/month in electricity costs. It does have 16 spinning disks in it, so I accept that I pay for the energy to keep them spinning 24/7, but I like the redundancy of RAID10, and I have two 8-disk arrays in the machine. And a Ryzen-7 5700G, 10gbit NIC, 16 port RAID card, and 96GB of RAM.

How have you measured the power usage/cost? That seems like a incredibly high price for electricity, similar to a 600W constant load in my part of the world.

Re: My Homelab Setup

#190

Post by renehsz »

shiroiuma wrote: post #147
decryption wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

16GB would be plenty. I've got like a dozen services running on an 8GB i7-4970 and it's only using 5GB of RAM right now.

If you're running ZFS, it's advisable to use more RAM. ZFS is a RAM hog. I'm using 32GB on my home server.

ZFS doesn't really need huge amounts of RAM. Most of the memory usage people see is the Adaptive Replacement Cache (ARC), which will happily use as much memory as you throw at it, but will also shrink very quickly under memory pressure. ZFS really works fine with very little RAM (even less than the recommended 2GB), just with a smaller cache and thus lower performance. The only exception is if you enable deduplication, which will try to keep the entire Deduplication Table (DDT) in memory. But for most workloads, it doesn't make sense to enable that feature anyways.
Post reply on HN