Oh I see what you mean yeah, I’ve never used NFS before with it.

Yeah it sounds nice but too much time investment for me.

I can install PBS client on any system but it requires manual setup and scheduling which I don’t want to do. When used with Proxmox that’s all handled for me.

Also I don’t think Proxmox cares about storage either, I just use ZFS which is completely standard under the hood.

Thats bad practice though, external drives in Linux should be mounted with no write caching just like they are in windows.

No backup utility like PBS though, thats why I haven’t switched.

Intel AMT also works for out of band management on consumer hardware.

I don’t think I’ve ever had a quality brand PSU go out on me. Software RAID like MD or ZFS works fine on basically any hardware, and I wouldn’t use hardware RAID these days anyways.

I used to worry about that stuff and use enterprise hardware, but its just so expensive for decent performance, and so power hungry.

Like try and match even a budget i3-12100 or similar for single thread performance (needed for game servers mostly) and you really can’t with used enterprise gear. Plus that i3 has an iGPU that can handle a ton of transcoding tasks, and ML for stuff like immich search or frigate object detection. And it uses about 10w or less most of the time.

Yeah media is a good use case for it, and doesnt really need cache either.

It can’t, you lose space efficiency if the disks you add aren’t the same size as the old disks.

It has no parity, you can pair with snapraid but thats snapshot parity and not real-time parity. Depends on the use case if that would work or not.

Linux/opensource naming can be the wildest stuff.

The big thing is very easily mix and match different sizes of disks. ZFS as of recently can sort of do that, but its not as efficient.

It seems like every Linux distro I’ve used both of those will work fine.

For #3 every service will say something like that, even with paid accounts.

The main things that come to mind are you have to test/monitor 2 seperate actions instead of 1, and restores of single files could be more difficult since you need to login to the backup server, restore the file from a snapshot, then also copy that file back to your PC.

How does that get sent over rsync though? Wouldn’t you need snapshots on the remote destination server?

Why not just use a backup utility instead?

What happens if you accidentally overwrite something important in a document and save it though? If there’s no incremental versioning you can’t recover from that.

Yeah but then it’s not really a good backup!

Don’t log in to the container shell to edit files, just edit the file on your host directly.

Make sure the permissions allow the user searxng is running as access as well.

Surely restic or borg would be better for backups?

Rsync can send files and not delete stuff, but there’s no versioning or retention settings.

Different tools for different use cases IMO.

But neither do backups.