this post was submitted on 04 Jul 2023
88 points (97.8% liked)

Selfhosted

60543 readers
405 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.

  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.

Resources:

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

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
ruud@lemmy.world
Loki@lemmy.world
CannaVet@lemmy.world
devve@lemmy.world
ayyy@sh.itjust.works
curbstickle@anarchist.nexus
curbstickle_lw@lemmy.world
88
VMs or containers? (lemmy.world)
submitted 3 years ago by rpn@lemmy.world to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world
75 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I'm thinking about starting a self hosting setup, and my first thought was to install k8s (k3s probably) and containerise everything.

But I see most people on here seem to recommend virtualizing everything with proxmox.

What are the benefits of using VMs/proxmox over containers/k8s?

Or really I'm more interested in the reverse, are there reasons not to just run everything with k8s as the base layer? Since it's more relevant to my actual job, I'd lean towards ramping up on k8s unless there's a compelling reason not to.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] terribleplan@lemmy.nrd.li 2 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (2 children)

Yeah, I think the problem comes if you don't want to manually configure "Add-ons". Using this feature is only supported on their OS or using "Supervised". "Supervised" can't itself be in a container AFAIK, only supports Debian 12, requires the use of network manager, "The operating system is dedicated to running Home Assistant Supervised", etc, etc.

My point is they heavily push you to use a dedicated machine for HASS.

[–] InEnduringGrowStrong@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 years ago

Yea I've been running "core" in docker-compose and not the "supervised" or whatever that's called.
It's been pretty flawless tbh.
It's running in docker-compose in a VM in proxmox.
At first, it was mostly because I wanted to avoid their implementation of DNS, which was breaking my split-horizon DNS.

Honestly, once you figure out docker-compose, it's much easier to manage than the supervised add-on thing. Although the learning curve is different.
Just the fact that your add-ons don't need to go down when you upgrade hass makes this much easier.

I could technically run non-hass related containers in that docker, but the other important stuff is already in lxc containers in proxmox.
Not everything works in containers, so having the option to spin a VM is neat.

I'm also using PCI passthrough so my home theater/gaming VM has access to the GPU and I need a VM for that.

Even if they only want to use k8s or dockers for now, having the option to create a VM is really convenient.

[–] soldersmoker@reddthat.com 1 points 3 years ago

Yeah, I haven't missed the HASS add-ons but that's a good point