Personally, I wouldn’t bother wiping the asustor. There’s nothing wrong with OpenMediaVault, but it’s not any more straight forward than TrueNAS. If you’re looking for beginner simple, maybe something like HexOS or CasaOS would be more to your liking. But that makes me wonder about Proxmox for this setup. I love Proxmox and use it extensively at home and at work. It’s incredibly powerful and flexible, but it’s a lot less hand-holdy than TrueNAS. By all means give them all a try—thats the fun—but expect a learning curve before things really click.

This sounds like a very fun project. I also run a small local news organization and we use a company that specialize in managing small news sites (Our-Hometown.com, in case you want to give them a look). We’ve been very happy with their service for the past 25 years, so I don’t plan on leaving them any time soon, but, as a self-hoster, I’ve also spent a lot of time thinking about how I’d put together the infrastructure. I think my preference is Nginx plus Varnish for caching. Also, in case you’re not aware of it, Automattic makes a plugin for newsrooms that adds some industry-specific features (https://github.com/Automattic/newspack-plugin) that looks interesting, though I haven’t tried it.

Lee Hutchinson at ArsTechnica wrote an interesting series about hosting a weather news site in Houston that I thought was awful interesting and might be worth a read. Here’s part 1 and part 2.

Sure. For full disclosure, I also run separate compute and storage. I do think separating storage from a compute cluster can be a good option, but not necessarily for the use case described in the original question.

I’d recommend against separating storage and compute in most small environments. Separating them means you suddenly have higher latency and less bandwidth between your data and whatever you want to do with it. Sure, there are good reasons to do it (centralizing storage for multiple nodes, for example), but go into with your eyes open to the trade-offs.

Here’s one more opinion for you.

Running a NAS on Debian is a great idea if you don’t mind being responsible for all of the details that TrueNAS abstracts away. One thing I’d consider in your shoes is to use Proxmox VE rather than vanilla Debian. I say this because PVE uses a kernel with ZFS built in, so there’s no fiddling with DKMS to get it to work; it just treats it as a first-class file system (including on root). Having said that, either is a perfectly good choice.

If you want a UI, I’d heartily recommend Cockpit, which is included in the repos (just apt install cockpit). If you go the PVE way, you’ve got a couple options. You could either virtualize your existing TrueNAS, passing through the disks or (and this is my preference) let the host handle all the ZFS stuff and create an LXC container that just deals with filesharing. You’d bindmount a directory from the host that could be shared out via SMB and this is where I’d use Cockpit to manage the shares.

The PVE route makes adding VMs and containers pretty quick. I haven’t run into any issues passing through a GPU to either a VM or LXC, which can then be used inside a docker container.

In answer to the common pitfalls question, I think the biggest thing I see is that it’s important to document exactly what TrueNAS is doing for you. Did you encrypt the ZFS pool? Make sure you have the keys to unlock it and arrange for your next OS to do so gracefully. Are you managing snapshots and replication in TrueNAS? Document and adapt that. Something like sanoid/syncoid can manage this on a Debian system. How about monitoring? Don’t forget to set up notifications for disk failures. Any other services you’re using? NFS, iSCSI, cronjobs? Take care notes of everything because that’s the stuff that’ll be easy to miss if you jump straight to overwriting your old boot disk.

The way I handle this is to have two VMs running in separate hosts, each running my reverse proxy along with keepalived. I resolve my subdomains to the keepalived shared address and then keep the reverse proxy config in git with a cron job to pull updates.

Traefik is a very robust reverse proxy, but I think you have easier options. If you want to keep it all in the same stack, have a look at Caddy. The configuration is just a few lines. Another very good option since you’re already using pfSense would be to use the HAProxy plugin. You’ll get a UI to manage everything and Tom Lawrence has some very helpful videos about setting it up from start to finish.

If I remember correctly, that was largely in consideration of the large corpus of docker-packaged projects that could be used as a pre-built app ecosystem. That makes a lot of sense for anyone who really wants an appliance-like all-in-one system with minimal setup.

That’s certainly true in terms of TrueNAS Core, but FreeBSD itself is quite active (15.0-RELEASE dropped this month), as are the others BSDs.

I’m not sure what it is, but Scale has never thrilled me. I’ve tested it a couple times and I just didn’t get along well with it. I’ve tested know Jim Salter (practicalzfs.com) has frequently recommended XigmaNAS as a strong (albeit less pretty) alternative to TrueNAS. I did some tests with that as well and it seemed perfectly fine. In the end I decided that when I migrate off of Core this winter, it’ll be to a bare metal FreeBSD system. I’m using it as an excuse to better learn that ecosystem and to bone up on ansible, which I’m using to define all of my settings.

There’s lots of good stuff on YouTube, including from David Bombal and Jeremy Cioara. If you’re more of a listening-while driving person, years ago the Security Now podcast did a “how the internet works” series that gives a terrific overview of the TCP/IP stack (it’s from 2006, but it’s still very applicable). And if you like to read, Michael Lucas just released a “Networking for Sysadmins” book, which is excellent.

To my thinking the most important difference would be mobility. Using the Synology app would probably make setup somewhat easier, but if you ever decided to leave the Synology ecosystem migration would likely be more complicated. That by itself isn’t a recommendation one way or another, but it should definitely factor into your planning.

Sure thing—autofs is a pretty cool utility and it works with SMB as well.

If the storage isn’t present for PBS, the backup would fail. There are files inside the directory that PBS will notice are missing.

Mounting the NFS export in the PVE host is the simplest way to get shared storage into an LXC container. You have to fight apparmor to mount NFS or SMB inside the container directly.

No, I used an unprivileged container and I set the permissions on the NFS server to accommodate that.

I use it like I might use unbound or dnsmasq, but I’d think of it more like bind. It’s can be used as a recursive or authoritative resolver. It supports all kinds of protocols (DOT, DOH, DNSSEC, etc). Handles zone transfers easily. It’s pretty slick. Definitely worth a look

If you’d like some separation, one option is to create a VM on TrueNAS for PBS that connects to an NFS export where all the data would be stored.

What I did in this scenario is an LXC container running PBS, which uses a bindmount for storage. That bindmount is populated via an NFS export from my NAS, mounted on the PVE host using autofs so that if it disconnects, it will reconnect as soon as it can.

Technetium is a recursive DNS resolver with a nice web UI. If you’re familiar with PiHole or AdGuard Home, you can think of it in that genre, but much more full-featured.

If you haven’t already, check out the Awesome Open Source page’s Booking and Scheduling section.

That metadata is written into the photo by the camera, so Immich may not be able to accommodate this easily. Not sure about Canon specifically, but my Nikon cameras have a memory bank for manual focus lenses. Might be worth checking through your menus.

The two pieces of software have very different topologies.

In very broad strokes: Something like FunkWhale uses a server-client model. To get to it, you connect to it remotely and you need some way to get there. By contrast Syncthing behaves as a mesh of nodes. Each node connects directly to the other nodes and the syncthing project folks host relays that help introduce the nodes to one another and penetrate NAT.

No, you may not need a paid domain to use your self-hosted FunkWhale server (I haven’t dabbled with that service in particular). There are a few options.

1. You could probably use the direct public IP address or alternatively
2. Use a dynamic DNS provider (like afraid.org) to resolve your IP address
3. Use a VPN on all of your clients and use local DNS to resolve your FunkWhale server’s local IP address.

These all assume that you have a public IP address on your router and not one that’s being NAT-ed by your ISP.

Again, these are very broad strokes, but hopefully it helps point your in a direction for some research.