this post was submitted on 20 Jul 2025
38 points (100.0% liked)

Selfhosted

49669 readers
676 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.

Resources:

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

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
ruud@lemmy.world
CannaVet@lemmy.world
Loki@lemmy.world
HybridSarcasm@lemmy.world
devve@lemmy.world
HybridSarcasm@lemmy.hybridsarcasm.xyz
38
NixOS and/or TrueNAS - What are your experiences? (lemmy.blahaj.zone)
submitted 1 day ago by CatLikeLemming@lemmy.blahaj.zone to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world
21 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I'm planning on, eventually, putting together a NAS for myself. I've basically narrowed down the selection to either trying NixOS or going for TrueNAS, however I can't figure out how to decide between those two, as they are fundamentally quite different.

TrueNAS is a dedicated NAS OS so that's obviously enticing for me, but I heard if you also want to do some server stuff like hosting some things and not just storing data it is subpar? I never got the information out of people what exactly is supposed to be subpar about it, but I've seen those complaints a handful of times.

Meanwhile NixOS is just a Linux distro. I'm familiar enough with Linux, although NixOS is its own beast and from what I heard its documentation isn't quite what you'd get out of for instance the Arch Wiki, but it being declarative and easy to restore old versions in case something breaks allegedly makes it rock solid, so that also sounds interesting.

So, after thinking about those things, I was wondering if any of you who use either of them could share your experiences and what you like or dislike about either option?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] philpo@feddit.org 2 points 1 day ago

Yeah, I come from the same scenario. Consolidated multiple nodes incl. a NAS into one. Initially had the HDD (which run through a controller anyway) passed through to a TrueNAS VM. That was...a mistake. TrueNAS can become a real bitch if it's own VM storage is slower/has a hiccup while the rest of the pool is not. And a lot of other things are a PIA as well, e.g.permission wise, especially with a FreeIPA Domain. And all that for a quite hefty price in ressources.

The day I pulled the plug on that was a good day. Later had the issue repeat itself with a client system that the client brought with him.

Nowadays I really love the proxmox only solution,even though it's somewhat icky to run something directoy on the host - but it's acceptable imho,when it's literally built onto host data-as it is the case for ZFS NFS anyway.

(I have Samba in a proper LXC, though - but rarely use it these days as we run everything via NFSv4 by now)