Selfhosted

39226 readers

645 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:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

HybridSarcasm@lemmy.world

HybridSarcasm@lemmy.hybridsarcasm.xyz

Data HDD with SSD catch drive (lemm.ee)

submitted 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) by rambos@lemm.ee to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world

73 comments fedilink hide all child comments

After upgrading my internet connection I immediatelly noticed that my HDD tops 40 MB/s and bottlnecking download speed in qbittorrent. Is it possible to use SSD drive as a catch drive for 12 TB HDD so it uses SSD speeds when downloading and moves files to HDD later on? If yes, does it make sense? Anyone using anything simmilar? Would 512 GB be enough or could I benefit from 2TB SSD?

HDD is just for jellyfin (movies/shows), not in raid, dont need backup for that drive, I can afford risking data if that matters at all

All suggestions are welcome, Thx in advance

EDIT: I obviously have upset some of you, wasn't my intention, I'm sorry about that. I love to tinker and learn new things, but I could live with much lower speeds tho... Please don't hate me if I couldn't understand your comment or not being clear with my question.

HDD being bottleneck at 40 MB/s was wrong assumption (found out in meantime). I'm still trying to figure out what was the reason for download to be that slow, but I'm interested in learning about the main question anyway. I just thought I'm experiencing the same issue like many people today, having faster internet than storage. Some of you provided solutions I will look into, but need time for that and also have to fix whatever else I'm having issue with.

Keep this community awesome because it is <3

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] fiddlesticks@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Depends on the file system, I know for a fact that ZFS supports ssd caches (in the form of l2arc and slog) and I believe that lvm does something similar (although I've never used it).

As for the size, it really depends how big the downloads are if you're not downloading the biggest 4k movies in existence then you should be fine with something reasonably small like a 250 or 500gb ssd (although I'd always recommend higher because of durability and speed)

[–] lemmylommy@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

l2arc is a read cache. Slog only is for synchronous writes.

[–] fiddlesticks@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 3 weeks ago

Welp, guess I should do my research next time. Thanks for the heads up.

[–] rambos@lemm.ee 1 points 3 weeks ago

Thx. I use ext4 right now. I might consider reformating, but so many new words to reasearch before deciding that. I heard about ZFS, but not sure is that right for me since I only have 16 GB of RAM.

Downloads are 100-200 GB max, but less than 40 GB most of the time. I have 512 GB in use and 2TB SSD not in use, can swap them if needed