this post was submitted on 29 Jan 2026
151 points (92.7% liked)

Selfhosted

55931 readers
349 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:

  1. Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam posting.

  3. Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  6. No trolling.

  7. No low-effort posts. This is subjective and will largely be determined by the community member reports.

Resources:

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

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Anyone else just sick of trying to follow guides that cover 95% of the process, or maybe slightly miss a step and then spend hours troubleshooting setups just to get it to work?

I think I just have too much going in my "lab" the point that when something breaks (and my wife and/or kids complain) it's more of a hassle to try and remember how to fix or troubleshoot stuff. I lightly document myself cuz I feel like I can remember well enough. But then it's a style to find the time to fix, or stuff is tested and 80%completed but never fully used because life is busy and I don't have loads of free time to pour into this stuff anymore. I hate giving all that data to big tech, but I also hate trying to manage 15 different containers or VMs, or other services. Some stuff is fine/easy or requires little effort, but others just don't seem worth it.

I miss GUIs with stuff where I could fumble through settings to fix it as is easier for me to look through all that vs read a bunch of commands.

Idk, do you get lab burnout? Maybe cuz I do IT for work too it just feels like it's never ending...

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Pika@sh.itjust.works 12 points 1 week ago (21 children)

I'm sick of everything moving to a docker image myself. I understand on a standard setup the isolation is nice, but I use Proxmox and would love to be able to actually use its isolation capabilities and already have the isolation. The enviroment is already suited for the program. Just give me a standard installed for the love of tech.

[–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 week ago (11 children)

unless you have zillion gigabytes of RAM, you really don't want to spin up a VM for each thing you host. the separate OS-es have a huge memory overhead, with all the running services, cache memory, etc. the memory usage of most services can largely vary, so if you could just assign 200 MB RAM to each VM that would be moderate, but you can't, because when it will need more RAM than that, it will crash, possibly leaving operations in half and leading to corruption. and to assign 2 GB RAM to every VM is waste.

I use proxmox too, but I only have a few VMs, mostly based on how critical a service is.

[–] Pika@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago (10 children)

For VMs, I fully agree with you, but the best part about Proxmox is the ability to use containers, or CTs, which share system resources. So unlike a VM, if you specify a container has two gigs of RAM, that just means that it has two gigs of RAM that it can use, unlike the VM where it's going to use that amount (and will crash if it can't get that amount)

These CT's do the equivalent of what docker does, which is share the system space with other services with isolation, While giving an easy to administrate and backup system, while keeping it able to be seperate by service.

For example, with a Proxmox CT, I can do snapshots of the container itself before I do any type of work, if where if I was using Docker on a primary machine, I would need to back up the Docker container completely. Additionally, having them as CTs mean that I can run straight on the container itself instead of having to edit a Docker file which by design is meant to be ephemeral. If I had to take troubleshooting bare bones versus troubleshooting a Docker container, I'm going to choose bare bones every step of the way.(You can even run an Alpine CT if you would rather keep the average Docker container setup)

Also for the over committing thing, be aware that your issue you've stated there will happen with a Docker setup as well. Docker doesn't care about the amount of RAM the system is allotted. And when you over-allocate the system, RAM-wise, it will start killing containers potentially leaving them in the same state.

Anyway, long story short, Docker containers do basically the same thing that a Proxmox CT does. it's just ephemeral instead of persistent, And designed to be plug-and-go, which I've found in the case of running a Proxmox-style setup, isn't super handy due to the fact that a lot of times I would want to share resources such as having a dedicated database or caching system, Which is generally a pain in the butt to try to implement on Docker setups.

[–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 0 points 6 days ago (1 children)

oh, LXC containers! I see. I never used them because I find LXC setup more complicated, once tried to use a turnkey samba container but couldn't even figure out where to add the container image to LXC, or how to start if not that way.

but also, I like that this way my random containerized services use a different kernel, not the main proxmox kernel, for isolation.

Additionally, having them as CTs mean that I can run straight on the container itself instead of having to edit a Docker file which by design is meant to be ephemeral.

I don't understand this point. on docker, it's rare that you need to touch the Dockerfile (which contains the container image build instructions). did you mean the docker compose file? or a script file that contains a docker run command?

also, you can run commands or open a shell in any container with docker, except if the container image does not contain any shell binary (but even then, copying a busybox or something to a volume of the container would help), but that's rare too.
you do it like this: docker exec -it containername command. bit lengthy, but bash aliases help

Also for the over committing thing, be aware that your issue you've stated there will happen with a Docker setup as well. Docker doesn't care about the amount of RAM the system is allotted. And when you over-allocate the system, RAM-wise, it will start killing containers potentially leaving them in the same state.

in docker I don't allocate memory, and it's not common to do so. it shares the system memory with all containers. docker has a rudimentary resource limit thingy, but what's better is you can assign containers to a cgroup, and define resource limits or reservations that way. I manage cgroups with systemd ".slice" units, and it's easier than it sounds

[–] Pika@sh.itjust.works 1 points 6 days ago

They are very nice. They share kernelspace so I can understand wanting isolation but, the ability to just throw a base Debian container on, assign it a resource pool and resource allocation, and install a service directly to it, while having it isolated from everything without having to use Docker's emphereal by design system(which does have its perks but I hate troubleshooting containers on it) or having to use a full VM is nice.

And yes, by Docker file I would mean either the Docker file or the compose file(usually compose). By straight on the container I mean on the container, My CTs don't run Docker period, aside from the one that has the primary Docker stack. So I don't have that layer to worry about on most CT's

As for the memory thing, I was just mentioning that Docker does the same thing that containers do if you don't have enough RAM for what's been provisioned. The way I had taken that original post is that specifying 2 gigs of RAM to the point the system exhausts it's ram would cause corruption and the system crashes, which is true but docker falls for the same issue if the system exhausts it's ram. That's all I meant by it. Also cgroups sound cool, I gotta say I haven't messed with them a whole lot. I wish proxmox had a better resource share system to designate a specific group as having X amount of max resources, and then have the CT or vm's be using those pools.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (17 replies)