I haven't used TrueNAS since it was still called FreeNAS.
I liked FreeNAS for awhile, but after a certain point I kind of just learned how to properly use Samba and NFS and ZFS, and after that I kind of felt like it was just getting in the way.
Nowadays, my "NAS" is one of those little "mini gaming PCs" you an buy on Amazon for around ~$400, and I have three 8-bay USB hard drive enclosures, each filled with 16TB drives all with ZFS. I lose six drives to the RAID, so total storage is about ~288TB, but even though it's USB it's actually pretty fast; fast enough for what I need to for anyway, which is to watch videos off Jellyfin or host a Minecraft server.
I am not 100% sure who TrueNAS is really for, at least in the "install it yourself" sense; if you know enough about how to install something like TrueNAS, you probably don't really need it...
I was like this in the "I love to spend a lot of time mucking about with my server and want to squeeze everything out of it that I can" phase.
In the last few years I've transitioned to "My family just wants plex to work and I could give a shit about the details". I think I'm more of the target audience. When I had my non-truenas zfs set up I just didn't pay a lot of attention, and when something broke it was like re-learning the whole system over again.
I can setup Samba, NFS, and ZFS manually myself, but why would I want to? Configuring samba users & shares via SSH sucks. It's tedious. It's error prone. It's boring.
Similarly while docker's CLI interface is relatively nice, it's even nicer to just take my phone, open a browser, and push "update" or "restart" in a little gui to quickly get things back up & going. Or to add new services. Or whatever else I want. Sure I could SSH in from my phone, but that's awful. I could go get a laptop whenever I need to do something, but if Jellyfin or Plex or whatever is cranky and I'm already sitting on the couch, I don't want to have to get up and go find a laptop. I want to just hit "restart service" without moving.
And that's the point of things like TrueNAS or Unraid or whatever. It makes things nicer to use from more interfaces in more places.
> fast enough for what I need to for anyway, which is to watch videos off Jellyfin or host a Minecraft server.
4k Blu-ray rips peak at over 100 Mbps, but usually average around 80 Mbps. I don't know how much disk I/O a Minecraft server does ... I wouldn't think it would do all that much. USB2 (high-speed) bandwidth should be plenty for that; although filling the array and scrubbing/resilvering would be painful.
What do you mean by USB hard drive enclosures? Are you limiting the RAID (8 bay) throughput by a single USB line?! That's like towing a ferrari with a bicycle.
>I liked FreeNAS for awhile, but after a certain point I kind of just learned how to properly use Samba and NFS and ZFS, and after that I kind of felt like it was just getting in the way.
I've been a mostly happy TrueNAS user for about four years, but I'm starting to feel this way.
I recently wrote about expanding my 4-disk raidz1 pool to a 6-disk raidz2 pool.[1] I did everything using ZFS command-line tools because what I wanted wasn't possible through the TrueNAS UI.
A developer from iXsystems (the company that maintains TrueNAS) read my post and told me that creating a ZFS pool from the zfs command-line utility is not supported, and so I may hit bugs when I use the pool in TrueNAS.
I was really surprised that TrueNAS can't just accept whatever the state of the ZFS pool is. It feels like an overreach that TrueNAS expects to manage all ZFS interactions.
I'm converting more of my infrastructure to NixOS, and I know a lot of people just manage their NAS with NixOS, which is sounding more and more appealing to me.
TrueNAS is just web-based configuration management. As long as you only use the web UI, your system state can be distilled down to the config file it generates.
If you do a vanilla FreeBSD+samba+NFS+ZFS setup, you'll need to edit several files around the file system, which are easy to forget months down the line in case of adjustment or disaster recovery.
I'm starting a rebuild of my now ancient home server, which has been running Windows with WSL2 Docker containers.
At first, I thought I might just go with TrueNAS. It can manage my containers and my storage. But it's got proprietary bits, and I don't necessarily want to be locked into their way of managing containers.
Then my plan was to run Proxmox with a TrueNAS VM managing a ZFS raidz volume, so I could use whatever I want for container management (I'm going with Podman)
But the more I've researched and planned out this migration, the more I realize that it's pretty easy to do all the stuff I want from TrueNAS, by myself. Setting up ZFS scrubbing and SMART checks, and email alerts when something fishy happens, is pretty easy.
I'm beginning to really understand the UNIX "do one thing and do it well" philosophy.
Yeah, same. Almost all of the NAS packages sacrifice something - they're great places to start, but just getting Samba going with Ubuntu is easy enough.
I have a similar setup (a dell wyse 5070 connected to an 8 bay enclosure) though I do not use RAID, I simply have some simple rsync script between a few of a drives. I collect old 1-2TB hard drives as cold storage and leave them on a bookshelf. The rsync scripts only run once a week for the non-criticial stuff.
Not to jinx it, but I have never had a hard drive failure since around 2008!
Do you think the power consumption matters on your box here? Should you care about the "USB bottleneck"? How do you organize this thing so it's not a mess of USB cables? I kinda wanna make it look esthetically nice compared to something like a proper nas box.
The difference between what you've built and TrueNAS may well only become evident if your ZFS becomes corrupted in the future. That isn't to say YOU won't be able to fix it in the future, but I wouldn't assume that the average TrueNAS user could.
i have 4x 4TB drives that are in my dead QNAP NAS.
i've wanted to get a NAS running again, but while the QNAP form factor is great, the QNAP OS was overkill – difficult to manage (too many knobs and whistles) – and ultimately not reliable.
so, i'm at a junction: 1) no NAS (current state), 2) custom NAS (form factor dominates this discussion – i don't want a gaming tower), or 3) back to an off-the-shelf brand (poor experience previously).
maybe the ideal would be a Mac Mini that i could plug 4 HDDs into, but that setup would be cost-inefficient. so, it's probably a custom build w/ NixOS or an off-the-shelf, but i'm lacking the motivation to get back into the game.
TrueNAS on a good bit of hardware - in my case the latest truegreen NAS is fantastic. You build it, it runs, it's bulletproof. Putting Jellyfin and/or plex on top of it is fantastic.
I do both. The primary server runs Proxmox and I have a physical TrueNAS box as backup server, so I have to do it by hand on Proxmox.
“Have to”, since I no longer suggest virtualizing TrueNAS even with PCI passthru. I will say the same about zfs-over-USB, but you do you. I’ve had too many bad experiences with both (for those not on the weeds here, both are officially very much not supported and recommended, but they _do_ work).
I really like the TrueNAS value prop - it makes something I’m clearly capable of by hand much easier and less tedious. I back up both my primary zfs tank and well as my PBS storage to it, plus cold backups. It does scheduling, alerts, configuration, and shares, and nothing else. I never got the weird K8s mini cluster they ship - seems like a weird thing that clashes with the core philosophy of just offering a NAS OS.
Shouldn't it be more of a "why" to install TrueNAS on a RPi?
The only reason I can see is "I have one that I don't use". Because otherwise...
Idle power isn't all that much better than a low power Intel N100 or something similar. And it's all downhill from there. Network transfer speeds and disk transfers will all be kneecapped by the (lack of) available PCIe lanes. Available RAM or CPU speeds are even worse...
That's addressed in the second section of the article:
> I've found numerous times, running modern applications on slower hardware is an excellent way to expose little configuration flaws and misconceptions that lead to learning how to run the applications much better on more capable machines.
It's less about the why, and more about the 'why not?' :)
I explicitly don't recommend running TrueNAS on a Pi currently, at the end (though I don't see a problem with anyone doing it for the fun, or if they need an absolutely tiny build and want to try Arm):
> Because of the current UEFI limitations, I would still recommend running TrueNAS on higher-end Arm hardware (like Ampere servers).
I have actually made a Raspberry Pi based NAS and found it was a pain.
The SATA controller isn't terrible, but it and other hardware areas have had many strange behaviors over the years to the point of compiling the kernel being needed to fiddle with some settings to get a hardware device to do what it's supposed to.
Even if you're using power that is well supported eventually you seem to hit internal limits and get problems. That's when you see people underclocking the chip to move some of this phantom power budget to other chips. Likewise you have to power most everything from a separate source which pushes me even closer to a "regular PC" anyhow.
I just grab an old PC from Facebook for under $100. The current one is a leftover from the DDR3 + Nvidia 1060 gaming era. It's a quad core with HT so I get 8 threads. Granted most of those threads cause the system to go into 90% usage even when running jobs with only 2 threads, probably because the real hardware being used there is something like AVX and it can't be shared between all of the cores at the same time.
The SATA controller has been a bit flaky, but you can pick up 4-port SATA cards for about $10 each.
When my Raspberry Pi fails I need to start looking at configurations and hacks to get the firmware/software stack to work.
When my $100 random PC fails I look at the logs to find out what hardware component failed and replace it.
> The SATA controller has been a bit flaky, but you can pick up 4-port SATA cards for about $10 each.
If your build allows the extra money for an LSI or real raid controller is well worth it. The no-name PCI-e sata cards are flakey and very slow. Putting an LSI in my NAS was a literal 10x performance boost, particularly with zfs which tends to have all of the drives active at once.
> probably because the real hardware being used there is something like AVX and it can't be shared between all of the cores at the same time.
That's not the right explanation; each physical core has its own vector ALUs for handling SSE and AVX instructions. The chip's power budget is shared between cores, but not the physical transistors doing the vector operations.
I don't know about TrueNAS, but with Proxmox the two random 10$ SATA-cards I tried only gave me issues. With first one OS wouldn't boot, second seemed to work fine, but connected drives disappeared as soon as I wrote to them.
Used server-grade LSI cards seem to be the way to go. Too bad they're power hungry based on what I've read.
On the one hand it is good to discover that someone is tackling getting TianoCore working on the Raspberry Pi 5.
On the other hand, they still have the destructive backspace behaviour, and inefficient recursive implementation, that breaks the boot loader spinners that the NetBSD and other boot loaders display. It's a tiny thing, but if one is used to the boot sequence the absence of a spinner makes the experience ever so slightly jarring.
I should add, by the way, that this nicely demonstrates M. Geerling's point here about catching bugs by running things on a Pi.
The TianoCore's unnecessarily recursive implementation of a destructive BS is slow enough, on a Pi 4, and in combination with how the boot loaders themselves emitted their spinners, that I could just, very occasionally, see parts of spinner characters flashing very briefly on the screen when the frame refresh timing was just right; which led me to look into what was going on.
I have been using a Raspberry Pi 4 (8 GB RAM) as my NAS for nearly 5 years. It is incredibly reliable. I run the following software on it: Ubuntu 64-bit, Samba, Jenkins, Postgres and MariaDB. I have attached external hard drives through a USB hub (because Pi does not necessarily have enough power for the external hard drive). I git push to public Samba folders on the Pi, and trigger Jenkins, which builds and installs my server using docker in the Pi.
It was a fun project and looked cool but never really worked that well. It was quite unstable and drives seemed to disconnect and reconnect a lot. There are probably better quality connectors out there but I think for a NAS you really want proper SATA connections.
I eventually built my own box and went with OMV again. I like it because it's just userland software you install on Debian. Some of the commenters here who think TrueNAS is overkill might want to check out OMV if they haven't already.
To be honest I still only have a few TB of storage on it, probably not really enough to be worth all the hassle of building and configuring a PC, but it was more about the journey which was fun.
This is fun for learning purposes, but even with the PCIe 3 bus the Pi just isn't that great a server when compared to an Intel N-series machine.
I have two "normal" NAS devices, but I would like to find a compact N100 board with multiple SATA ports, (like some of the stackable HATs for the Pi, some of which will take 4 disks directly on the PCB) to put some older discarded drives to good use.
My go-to solution software-wise is actually to install Proxmox, set up ZFS on it and then drop in a lightweight LXC that exposes the local filesystem via SMB, because I like to tweak the "recycle bin" option and some Mac-specific flags--I've been using that setup for a while, also off Proxmox: https://taoofmac.com/space/notes/2024/11/09/1940#setting-up-...
QNAP TS-435XeU is a $600 1U short-depth (11") case with quad hotswap SATA, dual NVME, dual 10GbE copper, dual 2.5GbE, 4-32GB DDR4 SODIMM Arm NAS that would benefit from OSS community attention. Includes hardware support for ZFS encryption.
Based on a Marvell/Armada CN9130 SoC which supports ECC, it has mainline Linux support, and public-but-non-upstream code for uboot. With local serial console and a bit of effort, the QNAP OS can be replaced by Arm Debian/Devuan with ZFS.
Rare combo of low power, small size, fast network, ECC memory and upstream-friendly Linux. QNAP also sell a 10GbE router based on the same SoC, which is a successor to the Armada 388 in Helios4 NAS (RIP), https://kobol.io/helios4/
No UEFI support, so TrueNAS for Arm won't work out of the box.
Wouldn't straight ZFS with a vanilla OS make more sense for low power devices? TrueNAS, esp the kubernetes flavour seems to have a decent bit of overhead last I looked at it
Probably the closest thing that already exists is just running Cockpit[1]. 45Drives even maintains some helpful storage and file sharing plugins for it[2], though some of those are only compatible with x86 for now.
That TrueNAS ARM fork is great. I've set it up in VMWare Fusion on Mac mini M4 and it runs!
With Thunderbolt 4 M.2 NVMe enclosure, you can plug in M.2 SATA adapter to connect 8 SATA III drives. Little Pico PSU to power the HDDs and it makes a really low powered NAS.
My plan is to give TrueNAS a spin with two drives and if it is stable, move everything into it.
Secure boot isn’t mandatory, and if you want secure boot you don’t have to use Microsoft’s keys, you can enroll your own. Lanzaboote for NixOS for example doesn’t use shim - https://github.com/nix-community/lanzaboote .
[+] [-] tombert|6 months ago|reply
I liked FreeNAS for awhile, but after a certain point I kind of just learned how to properly use Samba and NFS and ZFS, and after that I kind of felt like it was just getting in the way.
Nowadays, my "NAS" is one of those little "mini gaming PCs" you an buy on Amazon for around ~$400, and I have three 8-bay USB hard drive enclosures, each filled with 16TB drives all with ZFS. I lose six drives to the RAID, so total storage is about ~288TB, but even though it's USB it's actually pretty fast; fast enough for what I need to for anyway, which is to watch videos off Jellyfin or host a Minecraft server.
I am not 100% sure who TrueNAS is really for, at least in the "install it yourself" sense; if you know enough about how to install something like TrueNAS, you probably don't really need it...
[+] [-] kimbernator|6 months ago|reply
In the last few years I've transitioned to "My family just wants plex to work and I could give a shit about the details". I think I'm more of the target audience. When I had my non-truenas zfs set up I just didn't pay a lot of attention, and when something broke it was like re-learning the whole system over again.
[+] [-] kllrnohj|6 months ago|reply
Similarly while docker's CLI interface is relatively nice, it's even nicer to just take my phone, open a browser, and push "update" or "restart" in a little gui to quickly get things back up & going. Or to add new services. Or whatever else I want. Sure I could SSH in from my phone, but that's awful. I could go get a laptop whenever I need to do something, but if Jellyfin or Plex or whatever is cranky and I'm already sitting on the couch, I don't want to have to get up and go find a laptop. I want to just hit "restart service" without moving.
And that's the point of things like TrueNAS or Unraid or whatever. It makes things nicer to use from more interfaces in more places.
[+] [-] toast0|6 months ago|reply
4k Blu-ray rips peak at over 100 Mbps, but usually average around 80 Mbps. I don't know how much disk I/O a Minecraft server does ... I wouldn't think it would do all that much. USB2 (high-speed) bandwidth should be plenty for that; although filling the array and scrubbing/resilvering would be painful.
[+] [-] aayushdutt|6 months ago|reply
[+] [-] mtlynch|6 months ago|reply
?!?
How do you fill 288 TB? Is it mostly media?
>I liked FreeNAS for awhile, but after a certain point I kind of just learned how to properly use Samba and NFS and ZFS, and after that I kind of felt like it was just getting in the way.
I've been a mostly happy TrueNAS user for about four years, but I'm starting to feel this way.
I recently wrote about expanding my 4-disk raidz1 pool to a 6-disk raidz2 pool.[1] I did everything using ZFS command-line tools because what I wanted wasn't possible through the TrueNAS UI.
A developer from iXsystems (the company that maintains TrueNAS) read my post and told me that creating a ZFS pool from the zfs command-line utility is not supported, and so I may hit bugs when I use the pool in TrueNAS.
I was really surprised that TrueNAS can't just accept whatever the state of the ZFS pool is. It feels like an overreach that TrueNAS expects to manage all ZFS interactions.
I'm converting more of my infrastructure to NixOS, and I know a lot of people just manage their NAS with NixOS, which is sounding more and more appealing to me.
[1] https://mtlynch.io/raidz1-to-raidz2/
[2] https://www.reddit.com/r/truenas/comments/1m7b5e0/migrating_...
[+] [-] jmwilson|6 months ago|reply
If you do a vanilla FreeBSD+samba+NFS+ZFS setup, you'll need to edit several files around the file system, which are easy to forget months down the line in case of adjustment or disaster recovery.
[+] [-] babypuncher|6 months ago|reply
At first, I thought I might just go with TrueNAS. It can manage my containers and my storage. But it's got proprietary bits, and I don't necessarily want to be locked into their way of managing containers.
Then my plan was to run Proxmox with a TrueNAS VM managing a ZFS raidz volume, so I could use whatever I want for container management (I'm going with Podman)
But the more I've researched and planned out this migration, the more I realize that it's pretty easy to do all the stuff I want from TrueNAS, by myself. Setting up ZFS scrubbing and SMART checks, and email alerts when something fishy happens, is pretty easy.
I'm beginning to really understand the UNIX "do one thing and do it well" philosophy.
[+] [-] hunta2097|6 months ago|reply
Now I just run Ubuntu/Samba and use KVM and docker for anything that doesn't need access to the underlying hardware.
[+] [-] icelancer|6 months ago|reply
[+] [-] some-guy|6 months ago|reply
Not to jinx it, but I have never had a hard drive failure since around 2008!
[+] [-] dustbunny|6 months ago|reply
[+] [-] Trustable8|6 months ago|reply
[+] [-] dfee|6 months ago|reply
i've wanted to get a NAS running again, but while the QNAP form factor is great, the QNAP OS was overkill – difficult to manage (too many knobs and whistles) – and ultimately not reliable.
so, i'm at a junction: 1) no NAS (current state), 2) custom NAS (form factor dominates this discussion – i don't want a gaming tower), or 3) back to an off-the-shelf brand (poor experience previously).
maybe the ideal would be a Mac Mini that i could plug 4 HDDs into, but that setup would be cost-inefficient. so, it's probably a custom build w/ NixOS or an off-the-shelf, but i'm lacking the motivation to get back into the game.
[+] [-] InTheArena|6 months ago|reply
[+] [-] otter-in-a-suit|6 months ago|reply
“Have to”, since I no longer suggest virtualizing TrueNAS even with PCI passthru. I will say the same about zfs-over-USB, but you do you. I’ve had too many bad experiences with both (for those not on the weeds here, both are officially very much not supported and recommended, but they _do_ work).
I really like the TrueNAS value prop - it makes something I’m clearly capable of by hand much easier and less tedious. I back up both my primary zfs tank and well as my PBS storage to it, plus cold backups. It does scheduling, alerts, configuration, and shares, and nothing else. I never got the weird K8s mini cluster they ship - seems like a weird thing that clashes with the core philosophy of just offering a NAS OS.
[+] [-] smokeydoe|6 months ago|reply
[+] [-] faangguyindia|6 months ago|reply
[+] [-] MezzoDelCammin|6 months ago|reply
The only reason I can see is "I have one that I don't use". Because otherwise...
Idle power isn't all that much better than a low power Intel N100 or something similar. And it's all downhill from there. Network transfer speeds and disk transfers will all be kneecapped by the (lack of) available PCIe lanes. Available RAM or CPU speeds are even worse...
[+] [-] geerlingguy|6 months ago|reply
> I've found numerous times, running modern applications on slower hardware is an excellent way to expose little configuration flaws and misconceptions that lead to learning how to run the applications much better on more capable machines.
It's less about the why, and more about the 'why not?' :)
I explicitly don't recommend running TrueNAS on a Pi currently, at the end (though I don't see a problem with anyone doing it for the fun, or if they need an absolutely tiny build and want to try Arm):
> Because of the current UEFI limitations, I would still recommend running TrueNAS on higher-end Arm hardware (like Ampere servers).
[+] [-] ddtaylor|6 months ago|reply
The SATA controller isn't terrible, but it and other hardware areas have had many strange behaviors over the years to the point of compiling the kernel being needed to fiddle with some settings to get a hardware device to do what it's supposed to.
Even if you're using power that is well supported eventually you seem to hit internal limits and get problems. That's when you see people underclocking the chip to move some of this phantom power budget to other chips. Likewise you have to power most everything from a separate source which pushes me even closer to a "regular PC" anyhow.
I just grab an old PC from Facebook for under $100. The current one is a leftover from the DDR3 + Nvidia 1060 gaming era. It's a quad core with HT so I get 8 threads. Granted most of those threads cause the system to go into 90% usage even when running jobs with only 2 threads, probably because the real hardware being used there is something like AVX and it can't be shared between all of the cores at the same time.
The SATA controller has been a bit flaky, but you can pick up 4-port SATA cards for about $10 each.
When my Raspberry Pi fails I need to start looking at configurations and hacks to get the firmware/software stack to work.
When my $100 random PC fails I look at the logs to find out what hardware component failed and replace it.
[+] [-] bbatha|6 months ago|reply
If your build allows the extra money for an LSI or real raid controller is well worth it. The no-name PCI-e sata cards are flakey and very slow. Putting an LSI in my NAS was a literal 10x performance boost, particularly with zfs which tends to have all of the drives active at once.
[+] [-] wtallis|6 months ago|reply
That's not the right explanation; each physical core has its own vector ALUs for handling SSE and AVX instructions. The chip's power budget is shared between cores, but not the physical transistors doing the vector operations.
[+] [-] rwyinuse|6 months ago|reply
Used server-grade LSI cards seem to be the way to go. Too bad they're power hungry based on what I've read.
[+] [-] odie5533|6 months ago|reply
[+] [-] c-hendricks|6 months ago|reply
[+] [-] JdeBP|6 months ago|reply
On the other hand, they still have the destructive backspace behaviour, and inefficient recursive implementation, that breaks the boot loader spinners that the NetBSD and other boot loaders display. It's a tiny thing, but if one is used to the boot sequence the absence of a spinner makes the experience ever so slightly jarring.
* https://github.com/NumberOneGit/edk2/blob/master/MdeModulePk...
* https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/blob/master/MdeModulePkg/U...
* https://tty0.social/@JdeBP/114658278210981731
* https://tty0.social/@JdeBP/114659884938990579
[+] [-] JdeBP|6 months ago|reply
The TianoCore's unnecessarily recursive implementation of a destructive BS is slow enough, on a Pi 4, and in combination with how the boot loaders themselves emitted their spinners, that I could just, very occasionally, see parts of spinner characters flashing very briefly on the screen when the frame refresh timing was just right; which led me to look into what was going on.
[+] [-] breadwinner|6 months ago|reply
[+] [-] NoboruWataya|6 months ago|reply
It was a fun project and looked cool but never really worked that well. It was quite unstable and drives seemed to disconnect and reconnect a lot. There are probably better quality connectors out there but I think for a NAS you really want proper SATA connections.
I eventually built my own box and went with OMV again. I like it because it's just userland software you install on Debian. Some of the commenters here who think TrueNAS is overkill might want to check out OMV if they haven't already.
To be honest I still only have a few TB of storage on it, probably not really enough to be worth all the hassle of building and configuring a PC, but it was more about the journey which was fun.
[+] [-] rcarmo|6 months ago|reply
I have two "normal" NAS devices, but I would like to find a compact N100 board with multiple SATA ports, (like some of the stackable HATs for the Pi, some of which will take 4 disks directly on the PCB) to put some older discarded drives to good use.
My go-to solution software-wise is actually to install Proxmox, set up ZFS on it and then drop in a lightweight LXC that exposes the local filesystem via SMB, because I like to tweak the "recycle bin" option and some Mac-specific flags--I've been using that setup for a while, also off Proxmox: https://taoofmac.com/space/notes/2024/11/09/1940#setting-up-...
[+] [-] transpute|6 months ago|reply
Based on a Marvell/Armada CN9130 SoC which supports ECC, it has mainline Linux support, and public-but-non-upstream code for uboot. With local serial console and a bit of effort, the QNAP OS can be replaced by Arm Debian/Devuan with ZFS.
Rare combo of low power, small size, fast network, ECC memory and upstream-friendly Linux. QNAP also sell a 10GbE router based on the same SoC, which is a successor to the Armada 388 in Helios4 NAS (RIP), https://kobol.io/helios4/
No UEFI support, so TrueNAS for Arm won't work out of the box.
[+] [-] Havoc|6 months ago|reply
[+] [-] ddtaylor|6 months ago|reply
The audience/needs for TruNAS are probably looking to not have to do much beyond either turning it on or plugging in an update stick.
[+] [-] marcosscriven|6 months ago|reply
[+] [-] geerlingguy|6 months ago|reply
[1] https://cockpit-project.org
[2] https://github.com/45Drives?q=cockpit
[+] [-] 01HNNWZ0MV43FF|6 months ago|reply
[+] [-] zackify|6 months ago|reply
I really wish I just used something else or raw Ubuntu server.
The Time Machine backup feature corrupts itself.
You can’t have home assistant and Time Machine backups on at the same time. It just feels like a janky UI that has no polish too.
[+] [-] cameldrv|6 months ago|reply
[+] [-] kilroy123|6 months ago|reply
[+] [-] InTheArena|6 months ago|reply
Probably not a great idea given how ZFS is architected for memory utilization and ECC. :-)
[+] [-] _mikz|6 months ago|reply
With Thunderbolt 4 M.2 NVMe enclosure, you can plug in M.2 SATA adapter to connect 8 SATA III drives. Little Pico PSU to power the HDDs and it makes a really low powered NAS.
My plan is to give TrueNAS a spin with two drives and if it is stable, move everything into it.
[+] [-] hhh|6 months ago|reply
[+] [-] dwedge|6 months ago|reply
[+] [-] Joel_Mckay|6 months ago|reply
GTFO, as you re-key your installations this fall with Microsoft's permission. =3
[+] [-] bpye|6 months ago|reply
[+] [-] atentaten|6 months ago|reply
[+] [-] jsd1982|6 months ago|reply
[+] [-] TechSquidTV|6 months ago|reply
[+] [-] jama211|6 months ago|reply