So... Around half of the 20GB my server has for storage is full, with Mastodon's attachments folder eating up ~ 3GB's of it.

So I went on my server provider's dashboard to see if there's anything that might help in me the future...

For about the **exact same cost** as the server itself (5 USD), I can either

- Upgrade my current server to double the storage, and double the RAM
- Get a 50 GB volume plugged in,
- or Get 250 GB's of "object storage" (that's just the base cost of enabling the thing, which I think includes the 250 GBs, and 1 TB of bandwidth)

I am never going to reach the object storage limits any time soon (at least intentionally), so it just feels "wasteful" to me.

On the other hand, IMO it's better than the pay-as-you-go pricing most other places I know has, because I can predict how much it's gonna cost me on both extremes of usage ("barely any visits" to "hugged to death")

I don't really know what I should do... I have a 500 GB HDD I barely use, can't I just send that over and tell them to stick it in the machine hosting the VM?


Also, I probably should switch over to a lighter base distro. Debian is nice and all, but I feel like something like Alpine would have less "stuff" on it.

(Also I should go check out all these "infrastructure as code" business because I set this server up all by hand and if I had to rebuild it I have no idea what's changed and what isn't)

· · Web · 2 · 0 · 0

(preemptive re: containers)

I used Docker for a long time and it was neat how every container's configuration was self-contained enough, but having to download 5 different base images of the same distro, where each one is 200 MB+, and having to keep all dockerfiles and the libs inside them updated is all just more work than `apt update && apt dist-upgrade`

Show thread
Sign in to participate in the conversation
unnecessary posts 2: the electric toot-aloo

Personal server. Totally overkill but ok.