So after months of dealing with problems trying to get the stuff I want to host working on my Raspberry Pi and Synology, I’ve given up and decided I need a real server with an x86_64 processor and a standard Linux distro. So I don’t continue to run into problems after spending a bunch more, I want to seriously consider what I need hardware-wise. What considerations do I need to think about in this?
Initially, the main things I want to host are Nextcloud, Immich (or similar), and my own Node bot @DailyGameBot@lemmy.zip (which uses Puppeteer to take screenshots—the big issue that prevents it from running on a Pi or Synology). I’ll definitely want to expand to more things eventually, though I don’t know what. Probably all/most in Docker.
For now I’m likely to keep using Synology’s reverse proxy and built-in Let’s Encrypt certificate support, unless there are good reasons to avoid that. And as much as it’s possible, I’ll want the actual files (used by Nextcloud, Immich, etc.) to be stored on the Synology to take advantage of its large capacity and RAID 5 redundancy.
Is a second-hand Intel-based mini PC likely suitable? I read one thing saying that they can have serious thermal throttling issues because they don’t have great airflow. Is that a problem that matters for a home server, or is it more of an issue with desktops where people try to run games? Is there a particular reason to look at Intel vs AMD? Any particular things I should consider when looking at RAM, CPU power, or internal storage, etc. which might not be immediately obvious?
Bonus question: what’s a good distro to use? My experience so far has mostly been with desktop distros, primarily Kubuntu/Ubuntu, or with niche distros like Raspbian. But all Debian-based. Any reason to consider something else?
I’m not familiar with Yunohost, but a really quick search makes it look like kind of a walled garden? I already have a walled garden with the Synology, and for a NAS I think that’s fine and I’m happy using the tools that come with it, but the shortcomings of such a system are precisely why I’m wanting to get a more standard Linux server to actually run my applications. If my first look at Yunohost is correct, I very much doubt it would be suitable for me.
Someone else suggested Caddy. And between their recommendation and some of the stuff I’ve come across when trying to install Nextcloud already, I think that if I do decide the Synology reverse proxy is insufficient, that’s probably what I’d go with.
The simple answer is just that it’s easy. I don’t have particularly complex needs right now. These two tools are already installed. I haven’t done very much with them, but what little I have done has shown itself to be really, really easy. And I don’t know what I would actually gain from a more manually approach. Definitely open to the idea of doing it myself if there is a particular reason for it though.
Ah ok yeah, thanks. So video transcoding is the only reason to consider Intel over AMD, then? I don’t have immediate plans to run Jellyfin, but it’s one of many things at the back of my mind I might want to do, so I’ll keep it in mind. It’s easy enough to have Jellyfin run on a server which accesses files stored on the Synology, and have transcoding take place on the server, right?
Thanks for all the help!
Not at all. It’s completely open source.
Yunohost makes it easy. That’s why I recommended it. It’s as simple as clicking a few buttons in the GUI.
I don’t like to speak in absolutes but pretty much, yeah.
Nothing’s ever easy in this self-hosting stuff but it should be pretty straightforward.
Being open source doesn’t necessarily preclude being a walled garden. If (and I fully admit I could be completely wrong about this) it makes it easy to do certain things through a friendly UI, but it becomes much harder or more awkward (or impossible) to do things that aren’t explicitly supported, as part of a deliberate design decision/tradeoff for that usability.
Anyway, thanks a heap for answering all my questions. Has been very helpful.
The phrase “walled garden” pertains to the intentional exclusion of certain features based on the use of one platform. Based on that, I object to the description, but I digress.
At the end of the day it’s just Debian and you can do anything you want to do through the terminal. But it is meant to be a simplified process and you may run into roadblocks doing things that way, yes. You are pretty much limited to what’s on their (vast) catalog.
I’m not sure I agree with your definition of walled garden. I’d say it’s a place that’s designed to be nice and easy to use within the bounds designed for you (the garden), but which protects the user from doing something that might harm them, even if that “protection” comes at the cost of being able to do other things they want to do, in a kind of paternalistic way (the wall). The classic example would be iOS, where the only apps you can install are the ones Apple has approved for you. Getting apps from the open web the way you would on Windows, macOS, or Linux could be dangerous!
Your description of:
Makes it sound very much a walled garden to me. Not as high-walled as iOS of course, but it’s a spectrum.
But anyway, it’s basically semantics. Not that important what you call it.