I payed about $350 for my 20TB drives, which at the rate offered here would pay of in less then 3 months. Add some overhead in for a NAS and some extra drives for a raid and it still easily pays of in half a year.
Shitty deal.
this post was submitted on 27 Jun 2024
49 points (87.7% liked)
Selfhosted
40329 readers
419 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
And the very first sentence says:
Unless you self-host at home on your own NAS
Own hardware is always cheaper in the long run
True, but S3 offers you extremely high availability and security for a quite fair price, and not everyone wants to immediately self host on their own hardware.
Cheaper to use Backblaze b2
Indeed, the article was written with Backblaze B2 as the S3-compatible storage used.
Or Wasabi
I stick data I will almost certainly never access again on glacier deep archive. Dirt cheap. Good place to escrow data.
Wasabi have similar pricing to glacier, but without the limitation
What do you do if your hardware is housed at home with crappy residential upload speeds?
It’s a genuine question because I’ve settled for hosting on Storj, but because my friends and family can’t be bothered to connect via its client I’m running a WebDAV rclone proxy on a VPS over Tailscale. So not only am I paying for the storage itself, I’m also paying for transferring the data and on top of all that, it defeats the point of Storj being P2P from and end-user perspective.
I got downvoted for this? 😂
Why should I use JuiceFS instead of rclone though?
I think rclone has somewhat bad latency, at least from prior experience (albeit with Google Drive). JuiceFS seems to cache locally and can run my Immich instance, etc. With pretty good performance
Use rclone
In Canada, external hard drives of 8-20TB capacity show up every now and then for a rate of C$20/TB (US$14.50) so it won't take more than 3 months to offset that cost. As a backup, online s3 storage might be reasonable.
E - Speak of the devil: https://lemmy.ca/post/23948873
Guys, read the article first! At least try, at the beginning it says:
Unless you self-host at home on your own NAS
Is that your article ?
I am in a bit of a funny position, I am volunteering in an underdeveloped country, and have my immich instance running at my in-laws. But I don't have access to my NAS. Backblaze would be ideal!
What have you done to run it there? Is it as easy as mounting juicefs, and pointing immich dirs there?
I have about 700gb that would have to be migrated, any ideas on that? Or would it be relatively transparent to immich just copy and pasting?
Yes :)
In theory it should be as easy as copy and pasting, but I don't know if that wouldn't fail because of a timeout. Though, I have managed to wget a Google photos backup directly into JuiceFS and extract + process it there, just took like a day of time.
Mounting your Immich dirs there is all it should take. I would be careful with database directories/sqlite, they seem to bug out when mounted in JuiceFS
Yeah. I would keep the db local, and probably the thumbs and intermediary photos too. But the full resolution would probably be in S3.
dB's are not good on object store, and not good running over the internet. I wish they had native S3 storage, as that would allow for high speed access, where as this will download to the server, then upload to the client which will add latency.
Cheers