Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


Shells Virtual Desktop
BMail.ag - Secure Email Service
Server.net
CPLicense.net
VPS Server
Buy VPN
Vultr
VMs for AI
HostDare
ReliableSite White-Label Dedicated Hosting for Resellers
InterServer VPS
BMail.ag - Secure Email Service
Best VPN
High-Performance Bare Metal Server Solutions
Karvl.com
Server Mania Cloud Hosting
DataWagon Hosting
AlphaVPS Hosting
Evoxt.com
Clouvider
VPS Hosting with NVMe
Residential IPs in the US & 4G Mobile Proxies in EU & US with Unlimited Bandwidth
ReliableSite White-Label Dedicated Hosting for Resellers
Rabisu - Hosting Solutions
Shells Virtual Desktop
New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.

HostBrr | BF2025 Deals | AMD Threadripper VPS €15/year | 1 TB Storage just €1/month! More Inside

1101113151623

Comments

  • We are manually activating orders so please allow up to 24 hours for service activation. ouch.

  • x1archx1arch Member
    edited November 2025

    @philwatcher said:
    @Motion3549 yes, I experimented a bit with seaweedfs. The specs look nice, but in the end I abandoned it as I felt it was too complicated for my usecase but I didn't benefit from its strengths (billions of tiny files). I'm not a JuiceFS shill, but I found its fewer options easier to get a good overview.

    Try garage, looks like it more easily than seaweedfs.

    I faced with the same issue on rclone but for s3 bucket where 20k+ files, the listing could take 4min, but --no-modtime option fix it, for now listing 3-5sec.

  • @philwatcher said:
    I use it (among other things) to store my 350GB Immich photo gallery data on it. I have a 50GB NVMe cache in front, and it performs smooth. If you want faster write speeds, then AWS, Azure and friends will happily offer you better performance, but not for that price.

    That sounds really cool. Imma try it out

  • Has anyone been able to get their backup tools connected to their DirectAdmin Storage Boxes?

    I can connect via bash and ssh on port 53211 but can’t connect on any file transfer tools or on Synology Hyper Backup. Can’t work with the main user or the one I created, trying to figure out if it’s user error.

  • JabJabJabJab Member
    edited November 2025

    @Dimtar said:
    Has anyone been able to get their backup tools connected to their DirectAdmin Storage Boxes?
    I can connect via bash and ssh on port 53211 but can’t connect on any file transfer tools or on Synology Hyper Backup. Can’t work with the main user or the one I created, trying to figure out if it’s user error.

    rclone works here via sftp. Main user, 53211 port and ssh key because fuck passwords.

    Thanked by 2x1arch zejjnt
  • zejjntzejjnt Member
    edited November 2025

    @Dimtar said:
    Has anyone been able to get their backup tools connected to their DirectAdmin Storage Boxes?

    I can connect via bash and ssh on port 53211 but can’t connect on any file transfer tools or on Synology Hyper Backup. Can’t work with the main user or the one I created, trying to figure out if it’s user error.

    @JabJab said:

    @Dimtar said:
    Has anyone been able to get their backup tools connected to their DirectAdmin Storage Boxes?
    I can connect via bash and ssh on port 53211 but can’t connect on any file transfer tools or on Synology Hyper Backup. Can’t work with the main user or the one I created, trying to figure out if it’s user error.

    rclone works here via sftp. Main user, 53211 port and ssh key because fuck passwords.

    Yup; FTP via 21, SCP/SFTP at 53211 and then arbitrary random ports for the Softaculous apps or scripts you use.
    I'm still poking around a bit but currently I'm using something like
    eval $(ssh-agent); sshfs -oPort=53211,auto_cache,compression=yes,dir_cache=yes,no_check_root,follow_symlinks,noauto,idmap=user,users,reconnect,delay_connect,nomap=error,transform_symlinks,default_permissions,IdentityFile=~/.ssh/sshkeyfile [email protected]:/home/username /mnt/mountpoint

    The above is cluttery because my SBC is being a bitch and I'm trying new stuff but you probably get the gist of it. Normally you should just be able to do like
    sshfs -oPort=53211,follow_symlinks,default_permissions,IdentityFile=file,reconnect [email protected]:/home/path /mount/point

    If you want better performance and/or hate yourself I suggest trying rclone since you can setup cache and shit like that as well.

    EDIT: Do note that you are not visibly chrooted most of the time so either manually use /home/username or ~/ so you don't mindfuck yourself needlessly :D

    EDIT2: Tips for troubleshooting;
    sshfs -osshfs_debug,LOGLEVEL=DEBUG3

  • @Motion3549 said:

    @philwatcher said:
    @Motion3549 yes, I experimented a bit with seaweedfs. The specs look nice, but in the end I abandoned it as I felt it was too complicated for my usecase but I didn't benefit from its strengths (billions of tiny files). I'm not a JuiceFS shill, but I found its fewer options easier to get a good overview.

    Did you install on bare metal or use Docker? I would like to set up with Docker to keep the system clean.

    I used bare metal. It is a single binary and many command line switches. You tell it directly where to store the files, so if you want to clean it up, just delete the single binary file and the folder where you told it to store its data. IMO no docker needed.

  • @philwatcher said: I use it (among other things) to store my 350GB Immich photo gallery data on it.

    how do u use immich with this like is it immich backups or something else?

  • Labze where are you? I need to sleep but I want servers more than sleep :'(

  • Is FUSE mounting a drive allowed?

  • @philwatcher said:
    Review of the DA Storagebox package: it's great! I got one last year. The old hardware performed good enough. A few weeks labze migrated to new hardware, and it runs amazing! Small enough writes perform fast due to the NVMe/SSD caching, so incremental backups are very fast. Reads used to be limited to 40MB/s, which was acceptable for backgroudn tasks or with a cache. I have never run into any limitations on the new HW.

    I use it (among other things) to store my 350GB Immich photo gallery data on it. I have a 50GB NVMe cache in front, and it performs smooth. If you want faster write speeds, then AWS, Azure and friends will happily offer you better performance, but not for that price.

    If anyone else wants to use the DA storagebox as a cloud drive, here's my setup: I use JuiceFS over SFTP and the JuiceFS-builtin caching and encryption. I mount the JuiceFS FUSE filesystem on a powerful VPS with less storage and use most of its SSD for the cache. When I do backups, I just mount the same JuiceFS filesystem on my homelab server and copy to local drive.

    Before JuiceFS, I used rclone to mount the Storagebox over SFTP, but rclone does not support filesystem statistice (e.g. how much of the FS is used) and file metadata has to be read over SFTP as well, so incremental backups over many small files were slow. Then I changed back to JuiceFS, it runs at a tad more overhead but has much faster metadata query.

    By the way, using the Storagebox as a rclone backend over SFTP is great as well - I just copied my rclone config to all my servers and have all my data available.

    What's the latency to storage box from your server? mine is around 150ms and rclone mount feels shitty for immich server.

  • @ehab said:
    i missed BIGBFBOX

    I missed it too!

    Thanked by 1tux
  • @rockerof87 said:
    Is FUSE mounting a drive allowed?

    Not possible, mount the storage box from another machine instead.

  • For those who missed BIGBFBOX, BFBOX should still work and gives 40% discount, still very worth it.

  • in StorageBox
    is it allowed store files that nothing to do with hosted website?

  • zejjntzejjnt Member
    edited November 2025

    @supremasi said:

    in StorageBox
    is it allowed store files that nothing to do with hosted website?

    Yup, you don't have to use the hosting features at all.

  • Picked up a 2TB storage box yesterday. Transferring some backups today and the speed is excellent - over 65MB/s from rsync.net to the storage box for large files using rclone (with default 4 threads).

    Thanked by 1tux
  • @network said:
    Picked up a 2TB storage box yesterday. Transferring some backups today and the speed is excellent - over 65MB/s from rsync.net to the storage box for large files using rclone (with default 4 threads).

    How much is the latency to storage box from your server.

  • What I found out is that, the rclone mount with a lot of small files depend a lot on latency otherwise 1024IOPS is great if the latency is low.

  • Then create two mounts; one FTP and one SCP :)

  • @rohitsingh1333 said:

    @network said:
    Picked up a 2TB storage box yesterday. Transferring some backups today and the speed is excellent - over 65MB/s from rsync.net to the storage box for large files using rclone (with default 4 threads).

    How much is the latency to storage box from your server.

    Neither service allows ping so I can't measure that but my estimate is under 20ms since it's Fremont, CA to somewhere in Utah according to ipstack.com.

    I also bought a storage VPS in Frankfurt but I'm having some problem getting it set up (waiting for ticket reply). Will report the speed I get from Fremont to Frankfurt when it's working.

  • @zejjnt said:
    Then create two mounts; one FTP and one SCP :)

    How does it solve the problem.

  • @x1arch said:

    @philwatcher said:
    @Motion3549 yes, I experimented a bit with seaweedfs. The specs look nice, but in the end I abandoned it as I felt it was too complicated for my usecase but I didn't benefit from its strengths (billions of tiny files). I'm not a JuiceFS shill, but I found its fewer options easier to get a good overview.

    Try garage, looks like it more easily than seaweedfs.

    I faced with the same issue on rclone but for s3 bucket where 20k+ files, the listing could take 4min, but --no-modtime option fix it, for now listing 3-5sec.

    Storage box ain't compatible with garage I guess.

  • edited November 2025

    @network said:

    @rohitsingh1333 said:

    @network said:
    Picked up a 2TB storage box yesterday. Transferring some backups today and the speed is excellent - over 65MB/s from rsync.net to the storage box for large files using rclone (with default 4 threads).

    How much is the latency to storage box from your server.

    Neither service allows ping so I can't measure that but my estimate is under 20ms since it's Fremont, CA to somewhere in Utah according to ipstack.com.

    I also bought a storage VPS in Frankfurt but I'm having some problem getting it set up (waiting for ticket reply). Will report the speed I get from Fremont to Frankfurt when it's working.

    I specifically bought one amd milan vps in frankfurt to mount storage box with less than 2ms latency. Will configure it now.

    And wanted to sell the older one in service transfer thread but got flagged as I don't qualify for it because of less than 60 posts:(

  • @rohitsingh1333 said:

    @zejjnt said:
    Then create two mounts; one FTP and one SCP :)

    How does it solve the problem.

    One if faster with many small files, the other with few larger.

  • @rohitsingh1333 said:

    @network said:

    @rohitsingh1333 said:

    @network said:
    Picked up a 2TB storage box yesterday. Transferring some backups today and the speed is excellent - over 65MB/s from rsync.net to the storage box for large files using rclone (with default 4 threads).

    How much is the latency to storage box from your server.

    Neither service allows ping so I can't measure that but my estimate is under 20ms since it's Fremont, CA to somewhere in Utah according to ipstack.com.

    I also bought a storage VPS in Frankfurt but I'm having some problem getting it set up (waiting for ticket reply). Will report the speed I get from Fremont to Frankfurt when it's working.

    I specifically bought one amd milan vps in frankfurt to mount storage box with less than 2ms latency. Will configure it now.

    And wanted to sell the older one in service transfer thread but got flagged as I don't qualify for it because of less than 60 posts:(

    PING ftpde1.hostypanel.com (89.144.8.124) 56(84) bytes of data.
    64 bytes from 89.144.8.124 (89.144.8.124): icmp_seq=1 ttl=57 time=0.812 ms
    64 bytes from 89.144.8.124 (89.144.8.124): icmp_seq=2 ttl=57 time=1.02 ms
    64 bytes from 89.144.8.124 (89.144.8.124): icmp_seq=3 ttl=57 time=0.780 ms
    64 bytes from 89.144.8.124 (89.144.8.124): icmp_seq=4 ttl=57 time=0.749 ms
    64 bytes from 89.144.8.124 (89.144.8.124): icmp_seq=5 ttl=57 time=0.765 ms
    64 bytes from 89.144.8.124 (89.144.8.124): icmp_seq=6 ttl=57 time=0.828 ms

    From my OVZ VPS with Ethernetservers in Frankfurt.

  • Is that DA box able to use as a s3 storage?

  • @kainjinez said:
    Is that DA box able to use as a s3 storage?

    nope.

  • Man, its way more than usable with rclone ftp mount on a machine located near to frankfurt even for multiple tiny files!

    Thanked by 1zejjnt
  • Dirt cheap, high quality storage services man!

Sign In or Register to comment.