this post was submitted on 18 Apr 2026
24 points (100.0% liked)

Selfhosted

60409 readers
223 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:

Detailed Rules Post

  1. Be civil.

  2. No spam.

  3. Posts are to be related to self-hosting.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or readme if you're providing a link.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title.

  6. No trolling.

  7. Promotion posts require active participation, with an account that is at least 30 days old. F/LOSS without a paywall has exceptions, with requirements. See the rules link for details.

Resources:

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

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I've been selfhosting a while. I run around 15 distinct services in docker containers, all on a single machine with a medium sized disk. It's a small form factor, and I recently had to add space, so I've attached an external USB storage device.

It feels clunky.

At what point does a performant SAN/NAS make sense more than local storage? When did you make the jump?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] irotsoma@piefed.blahaj.zone 3 points 2 months ago

I have always used small, cheap devices for the servers and NAS storage. I actually had a NAS for a long time to backup my personal devices, too, even before self-hosting. The NAS uses cheaper, slower drives but larger anf more of them and in RAID configuration for redundancy because I've had too many drives die on me over the years. And I then use NFS to cache the data locally on the servers which benefit from faster drives which can then be much smaller because they are more expensive per GB.