What's better for a truenas or OMV server or proxmox?

  • What is better for a truenas or OMV server, or maybe a proxmox server, e.g. Dell R740xd with 12 disk bays and 2x Intel Xeon Silver 4114?

    Both truenas and OMV seem to me to use relatively little CPU and RAM power, maybe truenas a little more because of the cash. So some power is wasted.

    Maybe you can mine connected via ssh and xmrig, but I don't know how it will affect the stability.

    In truenas there was an add-on that allowed mining. There are several threads on the forum about digging via ssh and running xmrig and digging.

    For me, the compose add-on is missing an example, e.g. a container mining from xmrig.

    Truenas, chiacoin doesn't seem to have such an addition to generate coins.

    There is also k8s but I have to test it.

    In both truenas and OMV (thanks to omv-extras) we can create virtual machines. But they are probably not as efficient as physical machines or containers. Because from what I remember, containers can use physical hardware and virtual machines have a virtualized processor somehow.

    You can always use proxmox to connect the disk controller to the HBA and truenas or OMV lives there, and xmrig copies either physically on the server or in a container. I know it's possible, but I don't remember the results - whether they were better or similar to those on pure Debian.

    If I have stated something incorrectly, please correct me in the comments.

  • chente

    Hat das Thema freigeschaltet.
    • Offizieller Beitrag

    What is better for a truenas or OMV server, or maybe a proxmox server, e.g. Dell R740xd with 12 disk bays and 2x Intel Xeon Silver 4114?

    OMV :)

    • Offizieller Beitrag

    For me, the compose add-on is missing an example, e.g. a container mining from xmrig.

    There isn't much demand for it. Just copy the Dockerfile from this github repo, build it in the Dockerfile tab of the compose plugin, and then copy the docker-compose file from the same repo and start it in the Files tab.

    n both truenas and OMV (thanks to omv-extras) we can create virtual machines. But they are probably not as efficient as physical machines or containers. Because from what I remember, containers can use physical hardware and virtual machines have a virtualized processor somehow.

    You can always use proxmox to connect the disk controller to the HBA and truenas or OMV lives there, and xmrig copies either physically on the server or in a container. I know it's possible, but I don't remember the results - whether they were better or similar to those on pure Debian.

    OMV's kvm plugin can passthrough a disk controller and creates the same KVM VMs that proxmox does. You can even use the proxmox kernel with the kernel plugin. VMs do use more resources than physical machines or containers but it isn't a lot. And OMV is pure Debian.

    omv 7.0.5-1 sandworm | 64 bit | 6.8 proxmox kernel

    plugins :: omvextrasorg 7.0 | kvm 7.0.13 | compose 7.2 | k8s 7.1.0-3 | cputemp 7.0.1 | mergerfs 7.0.4


    omv-extras.org plugins source code and issue tracker - github - changelogs


    Please try ctrl-shift-R and read this before posting a question.

    Please put your OMV system details in your signature.
    Please don't PM for support... Too many PMs!

  • For me it's OMV all the way (I will say I just use a JBOD), it would seem to me for a NAS OMV is slightly better than Proxmox as it seems to me easier to set storage folders and NFS, plus the shedload of plugins that come with it.


    I was looking forward to trying Scale, but I've seen more breakages when updating Scale than with OMV. Plus I prefer the docker setup that OMV has, I think Scales is based on kubernetes which I can't get my head around yet :(


    Plus with OMV you can also do VMs, Docker, K3s and LXC what more do you want to try? Plus it based on Debain and is very small foot print.

Jetzt mitmachen!

Sie haben noch kein Benutzerkonto auf unserer Seite? Registrieren Sie sich kostenlos und nehmen Sie an unserer Community teil!