Probably it would be smartest to install a Home Assistant VM inside of an Ubuntu sysyem. I can then use the Ubuntu system for other stuff, while the Home Assistant keeps running.
Would you recommend proxmox for this, or Vmware? I hope that the performance loss is not too big, so i want to find the ‘lightest’ VM.
Also, do i have to redo a lot of stuff from my current home assistant installation? Probably i will reinstall a lost of stuff, right?
Edit:
Ah, wait. I can use proxmox to run multiple systems in parallel! Sounds very sweet.
Edit2:
Still unsure if its better to have Proxmox with 2 VMs, or one Ubuntu Running Homeassistant in a VM.
Benefit of Proxmox: If not using the Ubuntu System, i can just shutdown the VM. And i can add further VMs if i want to.
Benefit of Ubuntu and VM: I can manipulate my homeassistant files with the Ubuntu system
If you are not familar with hypervisors like proxmox, I would not recommend this setup.
For a beginner its way easier to use a stable Linux OS, like Debian or Ubuntu (LTS) and virtualize e.g with Virtualbox. This way you can easily change the settings within the UI to your needs.
Before you do massive changes on a system you can also do a snapshot. But be careful here. Delete unneeded snapshots from time to time, as this will massively slowdown the VMs and your system. Basically I use snapshots only for testing and remove all of them later. For backups I clone a system from time to time and have file based backups as well…
For my needs Ubuntu usually comes also with too much bloat software. Therefore I recommend Debian and just install the DE (Desktop Environment) You could also use the latest Ubuntu Server installation and just install a light weight DE. Because for example KDE and Gnome look nice, but they use also more resources on the system.
Keep in mind. The simpler your host OS is installed the easier it is to do a major upgrade of a Linux version. e.g from one LTS to another LTS.
In addition I would not recommend using HAOS, instead go for a Core installation. You have way more flexibility with this setup. But well… This depends on the personal taste of course…
I am in fact working with proxmox during my master’s thesis, but never set one up by myself.
But i will go for this approach, because A) i can start and stop the Ubuntu installation while I leave Homeassistant running and B) i can add further systems in the future.
Why would you suggest me the Core installation?
It has a lot fewer features, and I am for example using lots of add-ons.
Well… I do not use proxmox at all. But as far as I can see you configure it completely over CLI or HTTP(S). I prefer QEMU and/or KVM. Or even enterprise solutions.
Now think about how you want to get the host OS on the TV? Ever tried GPU Passtrough? It’s kinda fun
A) i can start and stop the Ubuntu installation while I leave Homeassistant running and B) i can add further systems in the future.
=> A) does not make that much sense. Because proxmox is basically also running on a *nix system. With my suggested way you can start, stop, hibernate what ever any machine as you like.
=> B) You can add as many VMs as the resources will allow you.
What you are searching for is either a x-server + DE on the host, or you need to passthrough.
Edit: About your other question. I like to be in control of my tools and environments. But it’s just a matter of your own taste…
Proxmox features a user-friendly graphical interface and leverages KVM and QEMU virtualization technologies. It might be worth giving it a try. https://www.proxmox.com/en/proxmox-ve/features
And regarding the link you provided, I don’t see how it’s relevant to this discussion.
The OP want’s to use the NUC to connect to his TV. Basically he asked for a web browser to stream media to be installed on home assistant.
“As my tv can only be connected to the nuc via HDMI, I want the nuc to be able to stream media via HDMI. A web browser would be great.”
Maybe he can give a little bit more clearance what would be the use case.
Surely he could use DLNA or maybe even Plex to stream data. But this depends on the use case.
The link you provided states exactly what I wrote: “with a single web-based interface.”
Again, maybe it’s me, but by a matter of fact I do not want to configure anything via a webbrowser on my TV. Also using a webbrowser of a TV is pain in the ***.
Also it depends on the features of his TV, what can be possible. And in addition to that, what he wants to stream. When we are talking about usual streaming offers like netflix, amazon prime, disney, … or even media files this is a complete different use case.