this post was submitted on 07 Mar 2024
15 points (89.5% liked)

Selfhosted

40041 readers
815 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:

  1. Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam posting.

  3. 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.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  6. No trolling.

Resources:

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

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

I really want to run ceph because it fits a number of criteria I have: gradually adding storage, mismatched disks, fault tolerance, erasure encoding, encryption, support out-of-the-box from other software (like Incus).

But then I look at the hardware suggestions, and they seem like an up-front investment and ongoing cost to keep at least three machines evenly matched on RAM and physical storage. I also want more of a single-box NAS.

Would it be idiotic to put a ceph setup all on one machine? I could run three mons on it with separate physical device backing each so I don't lose everything from a disk failure with those. I'm not too concerned about speed or network partitioning, this would be lukewarm storage for me.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] MangoPenguin@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 8 months ago (2 children)

You end up wasting a ton of space though because each vdev has its own parity drives.

[–] bastion@feddit.nl 1 points 8 months ago

No matter what setup you use, if you want redundancy, it'll cost space. In a perfect world, 30% waste would allow you to lose up to 30% of your disk space and still be OK.

..but that extra percentage of used space is the intrinsic cost.

[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

What you lose in space, you gain in redundancy. As long as you're not looking for the absolute least redundant setup, it's not a bad tradeoff. Typically running a large stripe array with a single redundancy disk isn't a great idea. And if you're running mirrors anyway, you don't lose any additional space to redundancy.

[–] SidewaysHighways@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago

Yep I feel this way.

No point in pricing a single HDD because I'm shooting for parity on every vdev I spin up.

[–] MangoPenguin@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 8 months ago

Fair enough, it does add a good chunk of power usage though as HDDs are pretty power heavy at 5-7W or so.