Self Hosted - Self-hosting your services.

11444 readers

34 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

No harassment
crossposts from c/Open Source & c/docker & related may be allowed, depending on context
Video Promoting is allowed if is within the topic.
No spamming.
Stay friendly.
Follow the lemmy.ml instance rules.
Tag your post. (Read under)

Important

Beginning of January 1st 2024 this rule WILL be enforced. Posts that are not tagged will be warned and if not fixed within 24h then removed!

Lemmy doesn't have tags yet, so mark it with [Question], [Help], [Project], [Other], [Promoting] or other you may think is appropriate.

Cross-posting

!everything_git@lemmy.ml is allowed!
!docker@lemmy.ml is allowed!
!portainer@lemmy.ml is allowed!
!fediverse@lemmy.ml is allowed if topic has to do with selfhosting.
!selfhosted@lemmy.ml is allowed!

If you see a rule-breaker please DM the mods!

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

Zoe8338@lemmy.ml

dogmuffins@lemmy.ml

testman@lemmy.ml

[Question] For running Samba on a Debian host, what's the better solution? Native, LXC container, or VM? (lemmy.sdf.org)

submitted 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) by xapr@lemmy.sdf.org to c/selfhost@lemmy.ml

10 comments fedilink hide all child comments

My environment is a (freshly installed) Debian server with ZFS pools. I would like to store files in ZFS and share them using Samba.

My question is which is better from efficiency, effort, and security (for the host) perspectives? Running it natively on the bare-metal Debian host, running it in an LXC container, or running it in a VM? Why do you think one way is better than the others? I'm pretty familiar with VMs, but don't have much experience or knowledge of containers.

This is what I'm thinking at the moment, but I would appreciate any feedback:

Natively: no resource overhead, medium admin overhead (manual Samba configuration), least secure(?)
LXC: small resource overhead, least admin overhead (preconfigured containers and/or reproducible configs), possibly more security than native(?)
VM: most resource overhead, most admin overhead (not only manual configuration, but also managing virtual disk [including snapshots, backups, etc]), most secure

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] MangoPenguin@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I do LXC, just seems easier since I can mess with things and use Cockpit or whatever to manage it, without worrying about the host system.

[–] xapr@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Thank you. So the advantage of the isolation of LXC for you is to be able to tinker with the service without affecting the host.

[–] MangoPenguin@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, and it allows directly passing through storage, otherwise I use VMs if I don't need to do that.

[–] xapr@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 3 months ago

Thanks!