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
[–] LetMeThinkAboutIt@programming.dev 3 points 3 years ago (3 children)

Why not do both ? As I understand it, to do kubernetes clusters, you must have at least 3 hosts. They don’t need to be 3 different physical hosts: they could be VM (hosted on Proxmox).

Proxmox also having a very strong implementation of ZFS, then it could be used as the storage « host », and it gives you also the option to do snapshots of the VM (and the storage pool), as well as replication/etc.

[–] scottyjoe9@sh.itjust.works 5 points 3 years ago

A k8s cluster can run on a single host if that's what you want. I'm not sure if it would be worth the virtualisation cost to run it on VMs in the middle as well. If you were only ever going to run on a single host I probably wouldn't use k8s though, I would just run containers. 🤷‍♂️

[–] redcalcium@c.calciumlabs.com 1 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago)

You only need 3 host if you want to load-balance etcd, which I think totally unnecessary for selfhosting purpose. Some downtime when updating kubernetes is acceptable in selfhosted environment for personal purpose.

[–] aksdb@feddit.de 1 points 3 years ago

They don’t need to be 3 different physical hosts: they could be VM (hosted on Proxmox).

That is fine for training purposes, but not for real hosting. You typically don't guard against software crashes, but against hardware failures/outages. And this it not given with all three nodes on the same physical system.

In that case you can simply skip the HA setup and go with a single node. Or not use k8s at all and just manage containers using ansible and systemd or whatever.