Racknerd has VPSs starting at around $10/yr. Been using them to host my email/nextcloud/jellyfin proxies for a while now with no issues or unexpected downtime. They don’t have any of Linode’s advanced features, but they’re pretty hard to beat price-wise.
Be sure to avoid “remux” quality. I didn’t know what this meant at first - it’s a file with no compression an uncompressed 1:1 copy of the source, so even “low-resolution” video files can be truly massive. A 1080p movie should be between 2GB-10GB or so; I’ve found that remuxes are typically 15GB-50GB, or even larger.
So, what you said - it’s a 1:1 copy of the source. With no compression. Which is what I said, as far as I can tell?
What I don’t understand is why the article says it allows for smaller file sizes, when I’ve found without fail that remuxes are the largest variety by far. It made sense to me that a file produced without compression would be larger than the same file, compressed.
It can save data by excluding data streams that you don’t need. For instance, I don’t need French, Italian, Japanese, German 5.1 audio streams that each have 700Mbps bitrates or higher, nor do I need an English 1.5Gbps master audio stream, a 700 Mbps English stream, a 500 Mbps descriptive audio for the blind, and 5 different special edition commentary tracks for a film I’ll watch once or twice. All those tracks can really add up, and torrent sites are often country or language specific, so remuxes might have original language and/or native language audio only.
Ah, it looks like we have a small misunderstanding. I thought you were talking about uncompressed video, which is enormous. This is only used in HDMI cables for example. A 1080p60 uncompressed video is 2.98Gbit/s, or about 1.22 terabytes per hour.
A remux is “uncompressed” in the sense that it isn’t recompressed, or in this case transcoded. A remux is still compressed, just to a lesser degree than a transcode. This means the files are indeed larger, but the quality is also better than transcodes.
To clarify the article’s confusing statement: they claim that remuxes can reduce size by throwing away some audio streams, while keeping the original video. This is true, but the video itself hasn’t gotten any smaller: you are simply throwing away other information.
For self hosting I’d recommend either one of the Meshify 2 or Define 7, depending on local price and your specific needs. I personally went with the Meshify 2 XL and was blown away by the quality of the case. It’s built well and allows for a variety of configurations. It also makes maintenance very easy as the filters and side panels can all be removed without any tool to handle dust build up.
Anything that can can provide storage attached to the network is a potential NAS. It doesn’t take a lot of power to just offer and store files. If you start getting into stuff like live transcoding or heavy encrypt/decrypt that’s a bit different matter.
Here’s my advice. The most important things are that you have a free GPU slot and another PCIE slot on whatever you get. You’re going to want a GPU for transcoding when disk space gets tight. You want the extra PCIE slot for a sas card. Disk shelves are surprisingly cheap, and you can keep adding disk that way. They daisy chain.
As far as the OS, I’m partial to Unraid and Truenas but seriously, anything you are comfortable with will work.
What OS are you planning on running? I personally use FreeNAS(TrueNAS) and largely love it. There’s a steep initial learning curve, but it’s not too high.
I run it in a VM inside of esxi so I don’t need a lot of it’s more advanced features. But I do have a jail with deluge in it to handle my torrents. Deluge isn’t up to the task though so I may migrate to a separate VM with something else, or just make a new jail with a different client.
I’ve been using Kopia for all my backups for a couple years, both backing up my desktop and containers. It’s been very reliable, and it has nice features like being able to mount a backup.
Sending local ZFS snapshots to the remote ZFS might be problematic. Consider accidentally deleting important data locally and nuking all of your local snapshots, then sending that to the remote ZFS. You lost all of your snapshots and there’s no way to recover the deleted data. Instead do what I do - keep the two ZFS systems separate and use a non-ZFS mechanism to transfer data - rsync, Syncthing, etc. That way even if you delete everything locally, nuke all local snapshots and send the deletions via rsync remotely, you could still recover your data by restoring the remote ZFS to a snapshot prior to the deletions. For reference I have two ZFS machines doing frequent snapshots and Syncthing replicating data between them on immediate basis.
!selfhosted, please do critique if you find some fundamental issues with this.
Docs say this , so yeah. "send streams can either be “full”, containing all data in a given snapshot, or “incremental”, containing only the differences between two snapshots. ZFS receive reads these send streams and uses them to re-create identical snapshots on a receiving system. "
email is one of the only services i just gave up on (after rolling my own exchange for over a decade). its too annoyingly complex, tedious to do correctly for just yourself. its not worth it.
Self hosting email on non-mission critical domain for learning purposes might be okay if your intention is to get into the industry. Self hosting email for others on more production like setting you’re going to find yourself in a world of pain.
All it takes is one missed email (be it not making into their intended recipient’s inbox, or them not receiving an important notice in their inbox) and you’re never going to hear the end of it.
You’d also be liable for content your users send out from your servers — and I don’t mean the spam type, though if you get your IP blacklisted, your provider may want to have a word with you.
I’d strongly advise against going down this path, but if you do, be sure to have ways to legally shield yourself from any sort of potential liabilities.
I do not understand why everyone calling hosting email difficult? IT is like 5 RFC you need to read and implement. Sofware wise you will need mail agent, something for DKIM ( if it not build in in agent), “local delivery agent” ( probably presenting it as IMAP) + mail reader of your choice. Nothing too complex
It’s not complicated until your reputation drops for a multitude of reasons, many not even directly your fault.
Neighboring bad acting IPs, too many automated emails sent out while you were testing, compromised account, or pretty much any number of things means everyone on your domain is hosed. And email is critical.
The complex part isn’t the hosting part. Its the security part, the reputation management part, the uptime part, the troubleshooting delivery part and basically every other aspect other than running postfix+dovecot
Hosting your own email is a bad idea. Hosting OTHER PEOPLE’S email is a REALLY BAD idea. Self-hosting mail on a vanity domain is a good exercise to learn how SMTP, DNS, IMAP and other protocols interact.
If you don’t like Google, Apple, or Microsoft then sign them up with Proton or another hosted provider. You don’t want to be the reason someone lost income because they missed out on a critical email from a client or their job application was blocked because it was sent from a host with poor reputation.
I do that to my dead drives, but I’ve only had one fail that wasn’t an SSD. Moreso because the washers that separate the platters have a very satisfying ring to them that makes me keep them as a fidget toy.
I use the magnets to hold screws, it works great for that.
Unfortunately, SSDs have less interesting parts, so I just take them apart to destroy the chips after failure
selfhosted
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.