Selfhosted

40329 readers

368 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.
No spam posting.
Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.
Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.
Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).
No trolling.

Resources:

selfh.st Newsletter and index of selfhosted software and apps
awesome-selfhosted software
awesome-sysadmin resources
Self-Hosted Podcast from Jupiter Broadcasting

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

HybridSarcasm@lemmy.world

HybridSarcasm@lemmy.hybridsarcasm.xyz

233

Should I move to Docker? (lemmy.ca)

submitted 11 months ago by GreatBlueHeron@lemmy.ca to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world

218 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I'm a retired Unix admin. It was my job from the early '90s until the mid '10s. I've kept somewhat current ever since by running various machines at home. So far I've managed to avoid using Docker at home even though I have a decent understanding of how it works - I stopped being a sysadmin in the mid '10s, I still worked for a technology company and did plenty of "interesting" reading and training.

It seems that more and more stuff that I want to run at home is being delivered as Docker-first and I have to really go out of my way to find a non-Docker install.

I'm thinking it's no longer a fad and I should invest some time getting comfortable with it?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 0 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

Why would you try avoiding it if you understand how it works? It has so many upsides and so few downsides. About the only practical one is using more disk space. It was groundbreaking technology in 2013. Today it's an old and essential tool.

[–] GreatBlueHeron@lemmy.ca 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Because it seems overkill for a home server. Up until recently all I ran was Samba and a torrent daemon. Why would I install another layer of overhead to manage two applications on one server?

[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 4 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Because the overhead is practically none, barring the extra disk space. Maybe it's not worth using it for Samba and Transmission. But involve OpenVPN for Transmission in the mix and things get a lot more complicated if Samba has to keep serving LAN and Transmission has to stop whenever OpenVPN stops. If instead you grab this, the problem is solved by writing one 20-line docker-compose.yml and doing docker-compose up -d:

version: '3.3'
services:
    transmission-openvpn:
        cap_add:
            - NET_ADMIN
        volumes:
            - '/your/storage/path/:/data'
            - '/your/config/path/:/config'
        environment:
            - OPENVPN_PROVIDER=PIA
            - OPENVPN_CONFIG=france
            - OPENVPN_USERNAME=user
            - OPENVPN_PASSWORD=pass
            - LOCAL_NETWORK=192.168.0.0/16
        logging:
            driver: json-file
            options:
                max-size: 10m
        ports:
            - '9091:9091'
        restart: on-failure
        image: haugene/transmission-openvpn

A benefit of Docker's that helps even with a single-service deployment is the the packaging side. It allows for running near-arbitrary service versions on top of your host OS, stale, stable, bleeding edge or anything in-between.