I didn't see in the post, but have you considered also Btrfs if you are on Linux?
Currently, I use Btrfs on Synology, mainly because snapshots and checksums are nice, but I never really did the work to do benchmarks against other FS. In the past my choice was Ext4 or XFS with LUKS/LVM, then Btrfs matured and since then I moved to it. So far I had no issues, but YMMV, some people consider it still not entirely reliable, but I do backups. I'm setting up a FreeBSD server where ZFS was the natural choice, again snapshots, boot environments, native encryption and just maturity/reliability. I haven't considered OpenZFS yet, mainly because my Synology does not support it, but your benchmarks have some interesting numbers, when I'll have again enough money for some new HDDs I may give it a try.
I often click accept, at least for site banners that get through ublock. But my browser blocks 3rd party cookies and then it clears all cookies on close (except for trusted sites). I also use private browsing for random sites where I dont bother rejecting cookies usually.
I really think this cookie consent concept should have been a browser functionality, so I can make my default choice for all sites and be done with it.
I also ditched Google years ago for DuckDuckGo, but its not without problems for sure. Often times still full of obviously fake sites in results, that I try to report them. Many times it just returns nothing where Google still manages to give results. And I still have to scroll through their ads when I am on a machine without an adblocker (like Firefox Focus/Klar on Android). But I still rather use them than Google, if I don't find something it is usually not the end of the world and I just move on. Recently, I switched all my browsers to their noai site, on some I still have the lite version, I think.
Awesome, it definitely helps. I realized I have your blog already bookmarked, I subscribed to the RSS feed now as well :) I am new to FreeBSD and these kind of practical articles are really helpful. Thank you very much for sharing your knowledge with others.
If it works for you, it works. I just see the same phrases used repeatedly so frequently nowdays - including my own LLM conversations.
Regarding the use of LLM for picking infra. The issue I usually have with such task is that they frequently omit things - either from the list of options or the features compared. And depending on my familiarity with the topic, I might never notice, which might steer my decision making into a different direction. Basically a certain bias. Sometimes prompting it to repeat reveals more, but ultimately I end up hitting the search and doing my own research, then I might use the LLM again with now more knolwedge and data. Did you run into this too? What was your process?
I was kind of interested in the content, but I am so overloaded with AI slop by now, that reading this generated text gives me nausea.
I was looking to see why they landed on this stack, but there are no alternatives or evaluation criteria listed - given the generated article, I wonder how much of the infra was selected by an LLM.
Hah, what a coincidence, just started to look into yesterday how do I setup LDAP/OIDC on FreeBSD and today I was going to try FreeIPA or Keycloak. Thanks for sharing.
I know there are userspace implementations, but can't remember the specifics rn and don't have my notes with me.
> kernel modules for iptables-nft
I think you meant nftables. The iptables-nft package is meant to provide iptables interface for nftables for code that still expects that, afaik. I didn't run into that issue yet (knock-knock). According to docs nftables is available since kernel 3.13, so in theory it might be possible to build the modules for Synology.
However, I don't think I will be buying another Synology in the future, mainly because of other issues like they restricting what RAM I can use or what I want to use the M2 slots for, or their recent experiment with trying to push their own drives only, etc. I might give TrueNAS a try if I am not bored enough to just build one on top of a general purpose OS...
I have a fairly recent DS920+ and never had issues with containers - I have probably 10+ containers on it - grafana, victoriametrics/logs, jellyfin, immich with ML, my custom ubuntu toolboxes for net, media, ffmpeg builds, gluetun for vpn, homeassistant, wallabag,...
Edit: I just checked Grafana and cadvisor reports 23 containers.
Edit2: 4.4.302+ (2022) is my kernel version, there might be specific tools that require more recent kernels, of course, but I was so far lucky enough to not run into those.
Thanks for mentioning this, I am just beginning my FreeBSD journey and wanted to setup a small pre-boot env with mfsBSD[1], didn't know FreeBSD has a tool already to do something like that.
You can run a container on Synology and install your custom services, tools there. At least that is what I do. For custom kernel modules you still need a Synology package for something like Wireguard.
If you have OPNSense, it has an ACME plugin with Synology action. I use that to automatically renew and push a cert to the NAS.
That said, since I like to tinker, Synology feels a bit restricted, indeed. Although there is some value in a stable core system (like these immutable distros from Fedora Atomic).
I think it still works if you set your user agent to something like lynx. I had a custom UA set for Google search in Firefox just for this purpose and to disable AI overviews.
Concerns were raised regarding the authorship of this paper, validity of the research findings in the context of misrepresentation of the contributions by the authors and the study sponsor and potential conflicts of interest of the authors.
It is also hard for me to understand this angle. While in Russia at the moment and China the "they" is pretty much constant, it is not the case in EU. Why would be in their interest something that can be used against them the moment the tide turns?
Currently, I use Btrfs on Synology, mainly because snapshots and checksums are nice, but I never really did the work to do benchmarks against other FS. In the past my choice was Ext4 or XFS with LUKS/LVM, then Btrfs matured and since then I moved to it. So far I had no issues, but YMMV, some people consider it still not entirely reliable, but I do backups. I'm setting up a FreeBSD server where ZFS was the natural choice, again snapshots, boot environments, native encryption and just maturity/reliability. I haven't considered OpenZFS yet, mainly because my Synology does not support it, but your benchmarks have some interesting numbers, when I'll have again enough money for some new HDDs I may give it a try.