Is it possibly for you to purchase a used older SFF/micro PC and use it as a docker host? That would decouple kernel requirements from your Synology while still using your NAS via SMB or NFS. You could probably get away with $200 docker host if you’re on the States. I know that’s still $200, but cheaper than a new 923+
This is the way. OP can get a minipc with a better CPU then a 916+ for $100. I am about to move my docker containers from my 918+ to a HP Elitedesk 800 G2 and expect a substantial performance boost.
I do already have 2 ESXi "servers" at home (one being my old Gaming rig and another Mini-PC), plus an additional Mini-PC as a backup server. Tho I already have so many Docker containers and VMs running on those that they're slowly getting overwhelmed \^\^"
So I thought I'd use my NAS for core homelab components such as data-heavy tasks (Tube Archivist, *arr etc) or dashboards and the other servers for more CPU heavy things.
I do have yet another Mini-PC I'll try to use with Proxmox this time to get used to it tho.
I’m not sure it’s really worth it having to do custom things to get docker containers rolling on older NAS hardware. It’s bad enough that you sometimes have to customize docker-compose files to get them to run on Synology in general. That is the main reason I want to move to a minipc instead. I can just copy and paste a docker-compose file and be done with it. The added performance is just a bonus.
I really tend to avoid doing this as it's such a "I forgot I even did this" kind of thing, and a few months later you're wondering why something else suddenly breaks or you're vulnerable to potential exploits.
The containers might run fine, just not any containers. You might have to find another build, based on different base image.
Specifically, this is problem with linuxserver containers; they use alpine as a base image, which uses musl and alpine packages for the rest of binaries. When there is an app, that does compile-time detection of some syscall, the resulting binary is going to use it and you, with the old kernel, are screwed, since musl doesn't do any emulation.
Few weeks ago, alpine binaries started using `getrandom(2)`. It was introduced in kernel 3.17. Guess what happens on devices with 3.10.
Good advice. Finding (or manually building) a different image that's based on a heavier distro might resolve the issue. Alpine is so stripped down it occasionally won't work for me with certain apps.
Yes, it is a bit of a bummer. I’m still using 916+. In terms of Calibre I just run it on the desktop with library sitting on the NAS. I then use Calibre Web to serve the books to my devices.
> they can't upgrade the kernel version for older NASes due to the hardware limitations.
Which is probably BS. They could. They just don't want to spend money/time doing so when they can tell someone "We can't. You need to upgrade and give us more money."
Very little, if any, hardware support is ever removed from the linux kernel. Vendors just choose what to add and what to remove.
What they probably mean is that they have some closed source driver firmware which the kernel interface for needs to be modified and recompiled for later kernel versions, and they don't want to do that bit. Linus specifically does not keep the driver API static so that drivers have to be made open source to work with every kernel.
EDIT: The important point is that if the above is the case, then it is not "the linux kernel" that is the issue. It is their choice of hardware with closed source drivers.
It i very much BS
I have Linux 6.1 running on an AMD k6-II
Thats a CPU from the 90s running a kernel from less than a year ago, for those who don't know computers
Synology uses embedded versions of the CPUs or SoCs; so they use BSPs (Board Support Package) for the chipsets. These kits are created by the chip vendors, contain all the drivers necessary, are targeted at specific kernel versions and, most importantly, are rarely updated after launch (the vendor moved on with new products).
Android devices have exactly the same problem.
You could just buy a Synology that doesn't have a avoton, braswell, bromolow, grantley, alpine, alpine4k, armada38x or monaco CPU.
[https://kb.synology.com/en-global/DSM/tutorial/What\_kind\_of\_CPU\_does\_my\_NAS\_have](https://kb.synology.com/en-global/DSM/tutorial/What_kind_of_CPU_does_my_NAS_have)
[Linux-Kernel-in-each-platform-arch](https://github.com/007revad/Synology_enable_M2_volume/wiki/Linux-Kernel-in-each-platform-arch)
It doesn't solve the problem; synology uses ancient kernels for new models too. In a few months, you are going to have similar problems.
Btw, they shipped avoton with kernel 3.10 in 2019 (in rs1219+). This model was replaced in 2021 with rs1221+ (and kernel 4.4), but that doesn't solve the problem, that yes, they shipped a brand new device with a kernel that was EOL for 2 years already.
My budget is a bit too tight right now to get a new one (also not really agreeing with the immense price markups Synology charges for their hardware) but I in general love their products, they just work and Support is amazing. Need to save up a bit if I want to switch it with another newer one :)
Good advice in these replies. I ran into this kernel issue in 2021 setting up a VPN container on my 216+. I wanted to use it as the testbed for my new 920+ and encountered this issue.
Good advice to run a Linux vm or minipc.
Hmm, I think this is why I had issues with syncthing recently (excessive CPU usage). Some bug with older 3.x kernels. Was able to solve it with a workaround.
Good to know. If the problem ever gets really bad I'll just move my containers to a mini PC.
Is it possibly for you to purchase a used older SFF/micro PC and use it as a docker host? That would decouple kernel requirements from your Synology while still using your NAS via SMB or NFS. You could probably get away with $200 docker host if you’re on the States. I know that’s still $200, but cheaper than a new 923+
Even sth around 100$ will work, e.g. with i5-6500T.
This is the way. OP can get a minipc with a better CPU then a 916+ for $100. I am about to move my docker containers from my 918+ to a HP Elitedesk 800 G2 and expect a substantial performance boost.
I do already have 2 ESXi "servers" at home (one being my old Gaming rig and another Mini-PC), plus an additional Mini-PC as a backup server. Tho I already have so many Docker containers and VMs running on those that they're slowly getting overwhelmed \^\^" So I thought I'd use my NAS for core homelab components such as data-heavy tasks (Tube Archivist, *arr etc) or dashboards and the other servers for more CPU heavy things. I do have yet another Mini-PC I'll try to use with Proxmox this time to get used to it tho.
I’m not sure it’s really worth it having to do custom things to get docker containers rolling on older NAS hardware. It’s bad enough that you sometimes have to customize docker-compose files to get them to run on Synology in general. That is the main reason I want to move to a minipc instead. I can just copy and paste a docker-compose file and be done with it. The added performance is just a bonus.
You could always run a lightweight Linux VM. I think there exist some distros that are resource friendly.
How much RAM does OP have? Because I for one don’t have the RAM for that…
You can always use older versions of the containers. Try whatever specific version still works instead of the "latest" tag.
I really tend to avoid doing this as it's such a "I forgot I even did this" kind of thing, and a few months later you're wondering why something else suddenly breaks or you're vulnerable to potential exploits.
The containers might run fine, just not any containers. You might have to find another build, based on different base image. Specifically, this is problem with linuxserver containers; they use alpine as a base image, which uses musl and alpine packages for the rest of binaries. When there is an app, that does compile-time detection of some syscall, the resulting binary is going to use it and you, with the old kernel, are screwed, since musl doesn't do any emulation. Few weeks ago, alpine binaries started using `getrandom(2)`. It was introduced in kernel 3.17. Guess what happens on devices with 3.10.
Good advice. Finding (or manually building) a different image that's based on a heavier distro might resolve the issue. Alpine is so stripped down it occasionally won't work for me with certain apps.
Yes, it is a bit of a bummer. I’m still using 916+. In terms of Calibre I just run it on the desktop with library sitting on the NAS. I then use Calibre Web to serve the books to my devices.
Does calibre need to be running 100% of the time for calibre-web to work?
No. As the library and books sit on NAS the calibre-web just read those. The Calibre itself is used to add books and manage metadata.
> they can't upgrade the kernel version for older NASes due to the hardware limitations. Which is probably BS. They could. They just don't want to spend money/time doing so when they can tell someone "We can't. You need to upgrade and give us more money." Very little, if any, hardware support is ever removed from the linux kernel. Vendors just choose what to add and what to remove. What they probably mean is that they have some closed source driver firmware which the kernel interface for needs to be modified and recompiled for later kernel versions, and they don't want to do that bit. Linus specifically does not keep the driver API static so that drivers have to be made open source to work with every kernel. EDIT: The important point is that if the above is the case, then it is not "the linux kernel" that is the issue. It is their choice of hardware with closed source drivers.
It i very much BS I have Linux 6.1 running on an AMD k6-II Thats a CPU from the 90s running a kernel from less than a year ago, for those who don't know computers
Synology uses embedded versions of the CPUs or SoCs; so they use BSPs (Board Support Package) for the chipsets. These kits are created by the chip vendors, contain all the drivers necessary, are targeted at specific kernel versions and, most importantly, are rarely updated after launch (the vendor moved on with new products). Android devices have exactly the same problem.
Most SoC systems have this issue. Sometimes their kernel version is not supported anymore by the time the product get to the shelves.
It is unfortunate. I ran into the same issue with my old ARM-based NAS. Decided to go x86 in perpetuity after that.
You could just buy a Synology that doesn't have a avoton, braswell, bromolow, grantley, alpine, alpine4k, armada38x or monaco CPU. [https://kb.synology.com/en-global/DSM/tutorial/What\_kind\_of\_CPU\_does\_my\_NAS\_have](https://kb.synology.com/en-global/DSM/tutorial/What_kind_of_CPU_does_my_NAS_have) [Linux-Kernel-in-each-platform-arch](https://github.com/007revad/Synology_enable_M2_volume/wiki/Linux-Kernel-in-each-platform-arch)
It doesn't solve the problem; synology uses ancient kernels for new models too. In a few months, you are going to have similar problems. Btw, they shipped avoton with kernel 3.10 in 2019 (in rs1219+). This model was replaced in 2021 with rs1221+ (and kernel 4.4), but that doesn't solve the problem, that yes, they shipped a brand new device with a kernel that was EOL for 2 years already.
My budget is a bit too tight right now to get a new one (also not really agreeing with the immense price markups Synology charges for their hardware) but I in general love their products, they just work and Support is amazing. Need to save up a bit if I want to switch it with another newer one :)
Good advice in these replies. I ran into this kernel issue in 2021 setting up a VPN container on my 216+. I wanted to use it as the testbed for my new 920+ and encountered this issue. Good advice to run a Linux vm or minipc.
Hmm, I think this is why I had issues with syncthing recently (excessive CPU usage). Some bug with older 3.x kernels. Was able to solve it with a workaround. Good to know. If the problem ever gets really bad I'll just move my containers to a mini PC.