<p>The default path setup suggested by some docker developers that encourages people to use mounts like <code>/movies</code>, <code>/tv</code>, <code>/books</code> or <code>/downloads</code> is very suboptimal and it makes them look like two or three file systems, even if they aren’t (<em>Because of how Docker’s volumes work</em>). It is the easiest way to get started. While easy to use, it has a major drawback. Mainly losing the ability to hardlink or instant move, resulting in a slower and more I/O intensive copy + delete is used.</p>
<pclass="admonition-title">The default path setup suggested by some docker developers that encourages people to use mounts like <code>/movies</code>, <code>/tv</code>, <code>/books</code> or <code>/downloads</code> is very suboptimal and it makes them look like two or three file systems, even if they aren’t (<em>Because of how Docker’s volumes work</em>). It is the easiest way to get started. While easy to use, it has a major drawback. Mainly losing the ability to hardlink or instant move, resulting in a slower and more I/O intensive copy + delete is used.</p>
<p>The default path setup suggested by some docker developers that encourages people to use mounts like <code>/movies</code>, <code>/tv</code>, <code>/books</code> or <code>/downloads</code> is very suboptimal and it makes them look like two or three file systems, even if they aren’t (<em>Because of how Docker’s volumes work</em>). It is the easiest way to get started. While easy to use, it has a major drawback. Mainly losing the ability to hardlink or instant move, resulting in a slower and more I/O intensive copy + delete is used.</p>
<pclass="admonition-title">The default path setup suggested by some docker developers that encourages people to use mounts like <code>/movies</code>, <code>/tv</code>, <code>/books</code> or <code>/downloads</code> is very suboptimal and it makes them look like two or three file systems, even if they aren’t (<em>Because of how Docker’s volumes work</em>). It is the easiest way to get started. While easy to use, it has a major drawback. Mainly losing the ability to hardlink or instant move, resulting in a slower and more I/O intensive copy + delete is used.</p>
<p>The default path setup suggested by some docker developers that encourages people to use mounts like <code>/movies</code>, <code>/tv</code>, <code>/books</code> or <code>/downloads</code> is very suboptimal and it makes them look like two or three file systems, even if they aren’t (<em>Because of how Docker’s volumes work</em>). It is the easiest way to get started. While easy to use, it has a major drawback. Mainly losing the ability to hardlink or instant move, resulting in a slower and more I/O intensive copy + delete is used.</p>
<pclass="admonition-title">The default path setup suggested by some docker developers that encourages people to use mounts like <code>/movies</code>, <code>/tv</code>, <code>/books</code> or <code>/downloads</code> is very suboptimal and it makes them look like two or three file systems, even if they aren’t (<em>Because of how Docker’s volumes work</em>). It is the easiest way to get started. While easy to use, it has a major drawback. Mainly losing the ability to hardlink or instant move, resulting in a slower and more I/O intensive copy + delete is used.</p>
<p>The default path setup suggested by some docker developers that encourages people to use mounts like <code>/movies</code>, <code>/tv</code>, <code>/books</code> or <code>/downloads</code> is very suboptimal and it makes them look like two or three file systems, even if they aren’t (<em>Because of how Docker’s volumes work</em>). It is the easiest way to get started. While easy to use, it has a major drawback. Mainly losing the ability to hardlink or instant move, resulting in a slower and more I/O intensive copy + delete is used.</p>
<pclass="admonition-title">The default path setup suggested by some docker developers that encourages people to use mounts like <code>/movies</code>, <code>/tv</code>, <code>/books</code> or <code>/downloads</code> is very suboptimal and it makes them look like two or three file systems, even if they aren’t (<em>Because of how Docker’s volumes work</em>). It is the easiest way to get started. While easy to use, it has a major drawback. Mainly losing the ability to hardlink or instant move, resulting in a slower and more I/O intensive copy + delete is used.</p>
<p>The default path setup suggested by some docker developers that encourages people to use mounts like <code>/movies</code>, <code>/tv</code>, <code>/books</code> or <code>/downloads</code> is very suboptimal and it makes them look like two or three file systems, even if they aren’t (<em>Because of how Docker’s volumes work</em>). It is the easiest way to get started. While easy to use, it has a major drawback. Mainly losing the ability to hardlink or instant move, resulting in a slower and more I/O intensive copy + delete is used.</p>
<pclass="admonition-title">The default path setup suggested by some docker developers that encourages people to use mounts like <code>/movies</code>, <code>/tv</code>, <code>/books</code> or <code>/downloads</code> is very suboptimal and it makes them look like two or three file systems, even if they aren’t (<em>Because of how Docker’s volumes work</em>). It is the easiest way to get started. While easy to use, it has a major drawback. Mainly losing the ability to hardlink or instant move, resulting in a slower and more I/O intensive copy + delete is used.</p>
<p>The default path setup suggested by some docker developers that encourages people to use mounts like <code>/movies</code>, <code>/tv</code>, <code>/books</code> or <code>/downloads</code> is very suboptimal and it makes them look like two or three file systems, even if they aren’t (<em>Because of how Docker’s volumes work</em>). It is the easiest way to get started. While easy to use, it has a major drawback. Mainly losing the ability to hardlink or instant move, resulting in a slower and more I/O intensive copy + delete is used.</p>
<pclass="admonition-title">The default path setup suggested by some docker developers that encourages people to use mounts like <code>/movies</code>, <code>/tv</code>, <code>/books</code> or <code>/downloads</code> is very suboptimal and it makes them look like two or three file systems, even if they aren’t (<em>Because of how Docker’s volumes work</em>). It is the easiest way to get started. While easy to use, it has a major drawback. Mainly losing the ability to hardlink or instant move, resulting in a slower and more I/O intensive copy + delete is used.</p>
<!-- BEGIN INCLUDE ../../../includes/hardlinks/breakdown-folder-structure.md -->
<!-- BEGIN INCLUDE ../../../includes/hardlinks/breakdown-folder-structure-docker.md -->
<h3id="breakdown-of-the-folder-structure">Breakdown of the Folder Structure<aclass="headerlink"href="#breakdown-of-the-folder-structure"title="Permanent link"></a></h3>
<p>The reason why we use <code>/data/usenet</code> for the usenet client is because it only needs access to the usenet files. In the usenet software settings, you’ll need to reconfigure paths and you can sort into sub-folders like <code>/data/usenet/{tv|movies|music}</code>.</p>
<p>The reason why we use <code>/data/usenet</code> for the usenet client is because it only needs access to the usenet files. In the usenet software settings, you’ll need to reconfigure paths and you can sort into sub-folders like <code>/data/usenet/complete/{tv|movies|music}</code>.</p>
<p>Sonarr, Radarr, Readarr and Lidarr gets access to everything using <code>/data</code> because the download folder(s) and media folder will look like and be one file system. Hardlinks will work and moves will be atomic, instead of copy + delete.</p>
@ -1164,10 +1181,11 @@ You may choose to rely on DockSTARTer for various changes to your Docker system
│ ├── music
│ └── tv
├── usenet
│ ├── books
│ ├── movies
│ ├── music
│ └── tv
│ └── complete
│ ├── books
│ ├── movies
│ ├── music
│ └── tv
└── media
├── books
├── movies
@ -1175,6 +1193,8 @@ You may choose to rely on DockSTARTer for various changes to your Docker system
<p>Plex, Emby, JellyFin and Bazarr only needs access to your media library using <code>/data/media</code>, which can have any number of sub folders like Movies, Kids Movies, TV, Documentary TV and/or Music as sub folders.</p>
@ -1187,6 +1207,8 @@ You may choose to rely on DockSTARTer for various changes to your Docker system
<p>The reason why we use <code>/data/usenet</code> for the usenet client is because it only needs access to the usenet files. In the usenet software settings, you’ll need to reconfigure paths and you can sort into sub-folders like <code>/data/usenet/{tv|movies|music}</code>.</p>
<p>The reason why we use <code>/data/usenet</code> for the usenet client is because it only needs access to the usenet files. In the usenet software settings, you’ll need to reconfigure paths and you can sort into sub-folders like <code>/data/usenet/complete/{tv|movies|music}</code>.</p>
<p>The default path setup suggested by some docker developers that encourages people to use mounts like <code>/movies</code>, <code>/tv</code>, <code>/books</code> or <code>/downloads</code> is very suboptimal and it makes them look like two or three file systems, even if they aren’t (<em>Because of how Docker’s volumes work</em>). It is the easiest way to get started. While easy to use, it has a major drawback. Mainly losing the ability to hardlink or instant move, resulting in a slower and more I/O intensive copy + delete is used.</p>
<pclass="admonition-title">The default path setup suggested by some docker developers that encourages people to use mounts like <code>/movies</code>, <code>/tv</code>, <code>/books</code> or <code>/downloads</code> is very suboptimal and it makes them look like two or three file systems, even if they aren’t (<em>Because of how Docker’s volumes work</em>). It is the easiest way to get started. While easy to use, it has a major drawback. Mainly losing the ability to hardlink or instant move, resulting in a slower and more I/O intensive copy + delete is used.</p>
<!-- BEGIN INCLUDE ../../../includes/hardlinks/breakdown-folder-structure.md -->
<!-- BEGIN INCLUDE ../../../includes/hardlinks/breakdown-folder-structure-synology.md -->
<h3id="breakdown-of-the-folder-structure">Breakdown of the Folder Structure<aclass="headerlink"href="#breakdown-of-the-folder-structure"title="Permanent link"></a></h3>
<p>The reason why we use <code>/data/usenet</code> for the usenet client is because it only needs access to the usenet files. In the usenet software settings, you’ll need to reconfigure paths and you can sort into sub-folders like <code>/data/usenet/{tv|movies|music}</code>.</p>
<p>The reason why we use <code>/data/usenet</code> for the usenet client is because it only needs access to the usenet files. In the usenet software settings, you’ll need to reconfigure paths and you can sort into sub-folders like <code>/data/usenet/complete/{tv|movies|music}</code>.</p>
<p>Sonarr, Radarr, Readarr and Lidarr gets access to everything using <code>/data</code> because the download folder(s) and media folder will look like and be one file system. Hardlinks will work and moves will be atomic, instead of copy + delete.</p>
@ -1440,10 +1457,11 @@ Remember these values for later use.</p>
│ ├── music
│ └── tv
├── usenet
│ ├── books
│ ├── movies
│ ├── music
│ └── tv
│ └── complete
│ ├── books
│ ├── movies
│ ├── music
│ └── tv
└── media
├── books
├── movies
@ -1451,6 +1469,8 @@ Remember these values for later use.</p>
<p>Plex, Emby, JellyFin and Bazarr only needs access to your media library using <code>/data/media</code>, which can have any number of sub folders like Movies, Kids Movies, TV, Documentary TV and/or Music as sub folders.</p>
@ -1463,6 +1483,8 @@ Remember these values for later use.</p>
<h3id="breakdown-of-the-folder-structure">Breakdown of the Folder Structure<aclass="headerlink"href="#breakdown-of-the-folder-structure"title="Permanent link"></a></h3>
<!-- BEGIN INCLUDE ../../../includes/hardlinks/bad-path-suggestion.md -->
<p>The default path setup suggested by some docker developers that encourages people to use mounts like <code>/movies</code>, <code>/tv</code>, <code>/books</code> or <code>/downloads</code> is very suboptimal and it makes them look like two or three file systems, even if they aren’t (<em>Because of how Docker’s volumes work</em>). It is the easiest way to get started. While easy to use, it has a major drawback. Mainly losing the ability to hardlink or instant move, resulting in a slower and more I/O intensive copy + delete is used.</p>
<pclass="admonition-title">The default path setup suggested by some docker developers that encourages people to use mounts like <code>/movies</code>, <code>/tv</code>, <code>/books</code> or <code>/downloads</code> is very suboptimal and it makes them look like two or three file systems, even if they aren’t (<em>Because of how Docker’s volumes work</em>). It is the easiest way to get started. While easy to use, it has a major drawback. Mainly losing the ability to hardlink or instant move, resulting in a slower and more I/O intensive copy + delete is used.</p>
2 years ago