Burn1ngBull3t

I’d say Daft Punk too 😄

Hello @theit8514

You are actually spot on ^^

I did look in my exports file which was like so :/mnt/DiskArray 192.168.0.16(rw) 192.168.0.65(rw)

I added a localhost line in case: /mnt/DiskArray 127.0.0.1(rw) 192.168.0.16(rw) 192.168.0.65(rw)

It didn't solve the problem. I went to investigate with the mount command:

• Will mount on 192.168.0.65: mount -t nfs 192.168.0.55:/mnt/DiskArray/mystuff/ /tmp/test

• Will NOT mount on 192.168.0.55 (NAS): mount -t nfs 192.168.0.55:/mnt/DiskArray/mystuff/ /tmp/test

• Will mount on 192.168.0.55 (NAS): mount -t nfs 127.0.0.1:/mnt/DiskArray/mystuff/ /tmp/test

The mount -t nfs 192.168.0.55 is the one that the cluster does actually. So i either need to find a way for it to use 127.0.0.1 on the NAS machine, or use a hostname that might be better to resolve

EDIT:

I was acutally WAY simpler.

I just added 192.168.0.55 to my /etc/exports file. It works fine now ^^

Thanks a lot for your help@theit8514@lemmy.world !

Hello ! You might find Sylius suitable. It’s an Open source framework based on Symfony.

Im pretty sure it has all your requirements. The thing is that it’s a headless framework, so a frontend needs to be built on top of that if you want some custom features.

Hope that helps !

Exactly thanks!

Haha sorry indeed, it’s Kubernetes related and not Windows WeDontSayItsName related 😄

You are completely right.

However in my mind (might be wrong here) if I use another node, i wouldn’t use the RAID array completely.

While setup up i thought that its either:

• NAS storageClass attached to the RAID array, no longhorn
• with longhorn when there is no RAID, but replication at 3

In either case, the availability of my data would be quite the same right ?

(Then there is options to backup my PV to s3 with longhorn and all that i would have to setup again though )

Thanks for your answer !

I would guess it doesn’t like replica at 1 indeed.

And using a NAS would be a single point of failure indeed, but how I’m using Longhorn right now already is (my storage node goes down, my cluster would be unstable)

Thanks !

Hello ! Thanks for your response!

Yes RAID is used as availability of my data here, with or without longhorn, there wouldn’t be much difference there (especially since i only use one specific node)

And you would be right, since the other nodes are unscheduled, it will be available only on my “storage node” so if this one goes down my storage goes down.

That’s why i might be overkill with longhorn, but there are functions to restore and backup to s3 for exemple that i would need to setup i guess

Hello ! First question would be : why buy an external drive if you are buying a NAS in the first place ?

Just in case: there are 2 slots available in the NAS you sent, meaning you could buy 2 internal drives for its storage.

On the hosting part, Jellyfin might be able to run judging by the specifications of the NAS. However, you have to take into account if the NAS operating system can run it (maybe there is an app store for it like Synology) and also media transcoding might be limited (to easily stream around your house 4K content for exemple)

Still from IT Crowd, it’s when Reynholm get sued by his exwife. The quote isn’t from that episode though

I think you are right indeed, i had the idea to maybe use the GC for AI stuff and play with it. I would probably go with kube and add the NAS in longhorn (that i already set up)

Would have been cool to add yet another machine to the cluster, especially if i could use the NAS for the kube VolumeClaims. 🤔