9
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 06 Apr 2025
9 points (90.9% liked)
Self Hosted - Self-hosting your services.
12522 readers
4 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 4 years ago
MODERATORS
Why would you only need a NAS in one environment? If everything is otherwise the same, and the function of the NAS is just hosting a similar service integration with less actual binary object data, then you make that same integration point available point in both environments to be able to test that portion.
If this is just homelab stuff, you don't need two environments like this, you just need a way to switch contexts and rollback between two places. This is not what staging environments are for.
No. I really need Production to be stable because other people will be using it. And I do not want my own playing around to cause issues.
I am really considering both @slazer2au@lemmy.world idea of a smaller NAS from the same company and @Zachariah@lemmy.world idea of just creating a new volume in the same NAS.
Well the NAS itself isn't the integration point is what I'm saying, the data is, right? So have a folder on your NAS for staging, and another for production, and make the connection to that data the integration point that is accounted for in your dotenv or whatever you're planning on using to control this
The only downside there is the single point of failure being the NAS, but having two separated NAS boxes by environment won't solve for a production outage anyway because each environment still has a single point of failure even if you have two NAS.
Just get it running as above first. Figure out that actual breaking points in your flow after using it for awhile.
If you're very concerned just have your prod environment and kick up test services in docker containers and test your tweaks and changes there.
Doing this ad-hoc will be easier and more practical than trying to maintain two full environments like you're a series B startup finding it's feet!
That will have a host of other issues that is not super fluid to work with while trying to maintain similar environments. Most notably the networking.
If this causes networking issues, your setup is already too complicated to manage through a flat set of docker containers. That's not a bad thing, this just isn't the horse for that course so to speak.
Not causing network issues, but for a layman that isn't familiar with managing multiple environments already, controlling a multi-env containerized environment is going to be a nightmare if solely just using containers as a staging environment. It doesn't map to what his prod env (non-container) would be, and it's not going to catch problems which would arise from his prod environment anyway if looking at from an integration standpoint.
I feel like that's a lot of assumptions based on OP's brief, but I don't disagree with anything you said.