this post was submitted on 19 Oct 2025
140 points (98.6% liked)

Selfhosted

61855 readers
453 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. Tags [CBH] or [AIP] are required, see the links in Rule 8 for details.

  8. 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:

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

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

It's proprietary, after all. I understand paid is fine, but even then, it usually better be open source.

So, why is Unraid an exception ?

Thanks

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] MangoPenguin@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 10 months ago (3 children)

The big thing is very easily mix and match different sizes of disks. ZFS as of recently can sort of do that, but its not as efficient.

[–] daq@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Mergerfs can do that too and you can keep the underlying fs as whatever you want.

[–] B0rax@feddit.org 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Yes, but it does not have redundancy or caching. Redundancy can be achieved with snapraid, but how you get caching I don’t know…

[–] daq@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Doesn't work for every use case, but perfect for mine. I was just pointing out other options.

[–] B0rax@feddit.org 1 points 10 months ago

And that is good! It would have been a better answer if you mentioned these major limitations as well so that interested people don’t need to look it up :)

[–] MangoPenguin@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

It has no parity, you can pair with snapraid but thats snapshot parity and not real-time parity. Depends on the use case if that would work or not.

Also no caching options.

[–] daq@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Valid points. I use it for my media collection I can easily restore and won't miss. Cache would be sort of nice to have and redundancy would just be wasting space.

[–] MangoPenguin@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 10 months ago

Yeah media is a good use case for it, and doesnt really need cache either.

[–] StopSpazzing@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago (3 children)

Can 100% do this. Not just kinda. Works fine.

[–] percent@infosec.pub 3 points 10 months ago

Can it access a file without spinning up all disks in the array?

I haven't used ZFS in like a decade, but would strongly consider going back to it if it can do that now.

[–] eclipse@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

Not really with the same flexibility.

You only get usable capacity of the smallest disk in a vdev or you have to add a new vdev with your newly sized disks.

Unraid lets you mix and match however you like and get all the usable capacity (as long as your parity is your largest sized disks).

[–] MangoPenguin@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 10 months ago

It can't, you lose space efficiency if the disks you add aren't the same size as the old disks.