60
Outgrown my Synology NAS, time for a proper dedicated machine
(sh.itjust.works)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 04 Jul 2025
60 points (100.0% liked)
Selfhosted
49269 readers
688 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:
-
Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.
-
No spam posting.
-
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.
-
Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.
-
Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).
-
No trolling.
Resources:
- selfh.st Newsletter and index of selfhosted software and apps
- awesome-selfhosted software
- awesome-sysadmin resources
- Self-Hosted Podcast from Jupiter Broadcasting
Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.
Questions? DM the mods!
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I think at this point I agree with the other commenter. If you're strapped for storage it's time to leave Synology behind, but it sounds more like it's time to separate your app server from your storage server.
I use proxmox, and it was my primary when I got started with the same thing. I recommend build out storage in proxmox directly, that will be for VM images and container volumes. Then utilize regular backups to your Synology box. That way you have hot storage for drives and running things, cold storage for backups.
Then, inside your vms and containers you can mount things like media and other items from your Synology.
For you, I would recommend proxmox, then on top of that a big VM for running docker containers. In that VM you have all of your mounts from Synology into that VM, like Jellyfin stuff, and you pass those mounts into docker.
If you ever find yourself needing to stretch beyond the one box, then you can think about kubernetes or something, but I think that would be a good jump for now.
Why not use Proxmox to host the containers directly instead of using a VM? I know it's easier to use this way but it kinda misses the point of using proxmox then
Not at all. Proxmox does a great job at hosting VMs and giving a control plane for them - but it does not do containers well. LXCs are a thing, and it hosts those - but never try to do docker in an LXC. (I tried so many different ways and guides and there were just too many caveats, and you end up always essentially giving root access to your containers, so it's not great anyway). I'd like to see proxmox offer some sort of docker-first approach will it will manage volumes at the proxmox level, but they don't seem concerned with that, and honestly if you're doing that then you're nearing kubernetes anyway.
Which is what I ended up doing - k3s on proxmox VMs. Proxmox handles the instances themselves, spins up a VM on each host to run k3s, and then I run k3s from within there. Same paradigm as the major cloud providers. GKE, AKS, and EKS all run k8s within a VM on their existing compute stack, so this fits right in.
Thanks for your point of view ! I'm still new to proxmox and I went the LXC route... Seems to be working well so far but time will tell!