Selfhosted

39435 readers

10 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

[email protected]

Are you reusing one postgres instance for all services? (jemmy.jeena.net)

submitted 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

42 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I have many services running on my server and about half of them use postgres. As long as I installed them manually I would always create a new database and reuse the same postgres instance for each service, which seems to me quite logical. The least amount of overhead, fast boot, etc.

But since I started to use docker, most of the docker-compose files come with their own instance of postgres. Until now I just let them do it and were running a couple of instances of postgres. But it's kind of getting rediciolous how many postgres instances I run on one server.

Do you guys run several dockerized instances of postgres or do you rewrite the docker compose files to give access to your one central postgres instance? And are there usually any problems with that like version incompatibilities, etc.?

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

[–] [email protected] 19 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

Nothing worse in Linux communities than gatekeeper answers like this.

It's fine to point out that something's challenging to someone who may be a novice, but to suggest it's above them? Eat it. At the very least, provide a resource and let them confirm for themselves.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

This right here... This whole community is about learning to do things for yourself. It might be after been given resources to learn you do decide its too much for you but people should be given the chance to discover that themselves.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago

Shout out to hack the box.

If you're a noob or a veteran in any branch of IT looking for a good cybersecurity community/platform...

Most of us IT folk check the box of "knowledge peaks and valleys". They're the first community I've found that seems to actually respect the idea that someone might know way more about XSS and SQL injection in react apps than some other guy knows about binary exploits through packet disassembly, and that both of them are fucking experts and neither of them are lacking for not knowing what the other knows.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Cybersecurity communities too, there was one guy on [The Other Site] I saw awhile back who, whenever somebody asked a question about what they should do to secure X or Y or if Z security product was better than V because they just did general IT, would always default to something along the lines of "If you don't know, don't bother its above you and you should shell out $$$ to an actual firm otherwise you'll be shelling out $$$$ to another firm to clean up your mess"

Surprise surprise, when I googled his username (The fact I was even able to do this isnt a great sign for a "security professional" IMO lmao) he actually owned one of those "Databreach Triage" firms...yea...I'm sure there was no conflict of interest whatsoever lmaoo