Selfhosted
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.
-
No spam.
-
Posts are to be related to self-hosting.
-
Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or readme if you're providing a link.
-
Submission headline should match the article title.
-
No trolling.
-
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. Tags [CBH] or [AIP] are required, see the links in Rule 8 for details.
-
AI-related discussions and AI-involved promotional posts have additional requirements for tagging, as noted in Rule 7 and the AI & Promotional Post Expanded Rules post, and find example disclosures here.
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!
view the rest of the comments
RAID isn't data redundancy, it's an array of drives combined to form a single logical storage pool. It solves the problem of needing a single storage pool larger than the available drives. As such, it's very sensitive to loss of a single drive.
At your storage size requirements (2 TB), RAID is unnecessary today.
Edit: Let me say it again for you downvoters-RAID is NOT data redundancy.
There is only ONE copy of your data in RAID (excepting mirroring). It's why RAID now has double parity and hot spare drive capability.
RAID is for creating a single pool that's larger than available drive size.
Go ahead and downvote in ignorance, and learn about data redundancy when your RAID fails.
RAID is NOT data redundancy - it's DRIVE redundancy.
Take it from the source https://www2.eecs.berkeley.edu/Pubs/TechRpts/1987/CSD-87-391.html
RAID0 has no redundancy, all other levels have (either mirroring or with parity)
That's not data redundancy - there's still only one copy of your data.
Those are mitigations against loss of data due to loss of parity.
There's still only ONE copy of your data.
I think you're confusing backup and redundancy. While I totally agree RAID1+ should not be considered backup, it absolutely is redundancy, as the same data is present on at least two disks (either on the form of the exact same data or something that can be used to rebuild the missing data).