So my plan based on reading was to get a mini pc and a nas. But then I realized... what is the best way to connect them. So I started doing more reading. And I confused myself.

So a NAS has it's own CPU and such, and other computers can talk directly to it over the network. But if I am using a mini pc to run the server, then I assume I would want a really fast direct connection to the storage. So it seems like I would want the NAS to be on the network as well as directly connected to the mini PC. And of course the mini pc would need to be on the network as well. Stuff I saw about connecting them directly seemed to pretty much use the Ethernet ports and a crossover cable. So that would mean that both devices would have to have two Ethernet ports, right?

And the bonus question is, would it just be better for the NAS to really be a dumb DAS for the mini pc instead?

Edit to summarize: For having two devices, the consensus is that LAN is good enough (just make sure you have a decent switch between them). A few like doing it all on one device for a variety of reasons.

all 27 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Mind me asking what your budget is?

Don’t get me wrong, but it seems you’re just starting out and to avoid biting over to much, it might be smart to look at at least some turn key solutions. Building a custom NAS with loads of drives is fun, but can get complicated.

I’d say get a pre-built NAS if you can afford to and run everything there. It’s easier and has loads of support available.

If you feel like you want more power, then consider adding a NUC or even full server later on and migrate over.
Forget about network speed. Wired is always fast enough. You’d strugle finding new hardware without Gbit these days anyways.

At least that’s how I started and with a N100 NUC running Proxmox now, I don’t see myself needing to upgrade for a long time. Learning Linux along the way is fun.

Good luck!

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Budget is really more about value than anything, I have money to spend, but I don't like to overspend or waste. Otherwise there are things I know, and things I don't. :) I do know linux, and some docker. I have built a few pc's over the years. But I don't really keep up with hardware stuff. The idea to have a NUC and a NAS just came from what I was reading as it seemed to be what people do. And the plan was to get a pre-built NAS and a mini pc. That way the whole project doesn't get so big it is overwhelming. The software stuff can be complicated from what I read. But I work in software, and I could use more time with docker and such. I was pricing things out when I got thinking about the connection between them, and thus how many ethernet ports I needed on the minipc. It sounds like people are saying that network speeds through a switch should be more than fast enough. I know this is probably the more expensive route, but I think the total cost may be at least reasonable. The minipc is like $169. Seems like the NAS is like $500. And a few hundred for drives. So maybe under a k. The way prices are these days, that doesn't feel terrible. But I don't really have a scope on costs for hardware.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

Sounds like you are on a good path then, mate.

I agree with the route you are taking. It's a great blend between price and performance. My only "last advice" would be to overspec the NAS a little, as it would suck having to replace it next year as your needs change.

Have fun with your project and feel free to reach out should you have any questions.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Stick the minipc and NAS on the same LAN. Almost all LANs are at least 1Gb which is far more than you need to stream a video of 4-8Mb/s for 1080P

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I have a Mini PC from China for 200$ Canuckian (That's like 25 US dollars) which has two 2.5 GB ports. A lot of NASes these days also have 2.5 GB. As long as you don't stick a 1GB switch between them, you have plenty fast speeds.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 days ago

Connected my NAS 10GbE directly to my proxmox 2.5GbE interface.
Set up the IP as static with jumbo frames and voilá direct NFS storage.
Took me 4 weeks to get it all together but man was it satisfying to see it work.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Since you're already building a custom server, isn't it just better to include HDDs in there, and have a single box? (just get a bigger case, SFF for example) It'd be good for power consumption as well. What are you trying to achieve with a separate NAS?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

To be fair i really like having a separate nas to my main docker/proxmox applications server. It allows me to mess around with my services or restart the system while not having to mess with the more sensitive spinning drives or important services like pihole.

Also gives me a nice method for local backup in 3-2-1 method.

That being said, I wouldn't recommend this for someone just starting out.

If anyone is wondering, I have the docker container itself mount the NFS share from the Unraid NAS. My docker server is all nvme ssds for things like the app itself and its config. Large data sets like photos and media are in the same via NFS.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Can you elaborate on why you wouldn't recommend it for someone just starting out?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 days ago

Its just another part of the puzzle you have to figure out.

When I first started, getting my reverse proxy, port forwarding, domain name etc working and debugging the issues took a lot of time and learning.

Certainly doable but will just make things harder

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 days ago

Hmm I see, you can always temporarily disconnect the drives too.

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

Well, mainly it is just what I read in various "guides". But also it sounds easier to assemble... the minipc is just a box, no need to do any hardware stuff. And I think the NAS is pretty much the same. Plus it would allow me to easily start small on space and then add more (I think).

Also, I think it would be quieter. I assume putting it all in one would mean basically a tower with lots of fans and what not. The minipc is supposed to be pretty quiet. Don't know about the NAS though.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 days ago

Oh of you didn't want to mess with hardware setups, them it makes sense.

FYI, there are nas cases like the jonsbo, and Celeron processors that you can build entirely fanless too.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 days ago (2 children)

no, you dont need multiple nics. todays networking is plenty fast. if you really wanted to mount fast youd maybe consider a iscsi, but thats just me showing my age.

depending on the nas... you would make some shared foldering available to the jellyfin machine to mount over the network. users connect to the jellyfin machine, jellyfin feeds them its mounted content.

personally, i use a local copy of the content (6x4tb drives) on the same machine as jellyfin and use the nas as backup. you have a backup, right?

some nas devices will allow multiple nics on the same network to increase throughput, but its really not about directly connecting 2 ethernet devices.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 days ago (2 children)

ok, I see. So network is fast enough. That works for me. The miniPC only has 500gb. So that is why I figure I need the extra storage. As for a backup, I figured I would have to raid it. The only other option I can think of would be to run a second NAS or something. And that seems like overkill.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 days ago

As for a backup, I figured I would have to raid it.

RAID is not a backup. Never ever consider having the data on a RAID to be backed up.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 days ago (1 children)

if you do not have a copy of something in different place, you do not have a backup. raid != backup!, its for reliability (and sometimes speed).

i actually have the local copy, a nightly backup to the nas device, and set of offline drives i keep in a pelican case i refresh a few times per year as a secondary backup.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I thought there was a raid setting where it basically duplicated the data across the drives such that if any one of them fail it can recreate the data. That should at least cover the "local" backup part. For more important things like family videos and such I have external drives that are offline unless I am uploading new videos and such. But really I should have some kind of offsite backup for that kind of stuff.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 days ago (1 children)

yes, that is what raid is but that is not a backup. it is making that single logical drive of your data resilient to a single drive failure. if anything goes sideways and you lose 2 drives, you lose 100% of your data. and it does happen. think power supply failure spiking your drives or whatnot.

you dont have to take my word for it, it is well known and well advertised that raid is not a backup.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 days ago

yeah, I am totally with you. For the media server, I just don't know how much money I want to put into backing it up. For the important stuff. I really wish I knew of an offsite backup that I felt like I could trust. But most business models' these days seem to be hinged on hoping nothing ever goes wrong... or just paying if it does.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 days ago (1 children)

If you can avoid having you server and the media library on separate systems you should. That means buying (or I suppose building, but I wouldn't recommend it) a NAS with sufficient processing ability to stream / transcode as much as you need, or stuffing a lot of storage into your mini PC.
One of the problems you'll run into if you use separate systems is that it's non-trivial to get the server to automatically notice new items in the media library and update to include them. I'm sure there are others.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 days ago

Also makes it much simpler to set up backups and migrate the compute-focused pc to a new OS without needing to look much after the files

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

For inspiration:
Old setup:

Computer/file host: 11th Gen NUC
Ext. 8TB HDD via USB
Passed through docker to Jellyfin container
File administration via arr-suite and SMB on my PC.

New setup:

Compute: 11th Gen NUC
Runs docker
file storage: TrueNAS scale via NFS to proxmox (direct connection via ethernet. uGreen DXP4800+ 10GbE <-> 13th Gen NUC with optional 2.5GbE LAN interface)
File host: Debian-VM
Mounted to NUC via NFS
File administration/access:
- PC: SMB to file server
- arr-Suite: NFS mount passed from host
- Jellyfin: Access via direct NFS mount in docker compose.

While not painless I think I learned a substantial amount on how Posix permissions work and confirms why native ACLs while more complicated are superior.
Also learned a bit about Samba, fstab and NFS c:

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 days ago

I have a mini pc with a 4TB drive connected to it for my jellyfin server, I also use the server as a nas for my osmc pi to watch stuff on the living room TV. 1Gbs is plenty fast for 1080p

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 days ago

First off you don't need cross over cables in 2024.

If you are just doing purely a media server you are fine with the local lan. Just get a switch and be done with it. If you are planning on doing something storage intensive like a bunch of VMs doing intensive work then you can get a dedicated link between the devices. However, that is most likely unneeded.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 days ago

First off you don't need cross over cables in 2024.