I was not clear on why I wanted a production environment.
The reason is that I want enough stability in it to be used by family and friends. Preferably without breakages. Immediate usages will be as shared storage, e-book management, game centre to run Minecraft for my kind who lives far away from me., etc.
Also, the list of services I will make available in production will vary throughout time.
This is why I mentioned a NAS in production. So that the hardware storage just works.
But, at the same time, I really do not have the budget to buy two similar NAS and test things in Sandbox.
I really get your point about having two different envs if I want to have perfect stability. But I was trying to figure out if I could make the Sandbox env a little bit less costly but go 80% of the way in terms of catching issues before breaking Production.
I may just buy a lower model of the same brand but lets see if other people suggest another approach.
I disagree with this assessment BUT I do not disagree with the title.
To explain, LLMs are growing.
The same way there is a GPL for code behind a service (GPL v3), there should exist a GPL for code used in LLM training.
That would include both the model AND the scripts and software to create the LLM.
And, it is fine if you, for now, do not have the hardware to run the model. In 1 to 2 years, you will anyway. And, better yet, you can run the LLM to train other, lightweight models.
OpenAI complained that DeepSeek did this, right. So, it should definitvely be a thing that a copyleft GPL v4 should allow.
There is another issue with DataView.
You, very quickly bump into slow queries in a medium size vault . I call having 4600 notes a medium size note, to be clear.
One of the limitations of Obsidian linking, and any markdown linking to be precise, is the fact that you cannot define the type of link. So, just use sentences next to the links. This way, you can evolve your locations saying what is in , next to or part of
As an example of evolving your locations and making the connections flexible, imagine that I start working on locations I care about. I am naming the locations and then slapping note content as they evolve.
[[Company A note]]
---
tags: #location
---
- a company is inside a [[City A]]
[[Department A note]]
---
tags: #location
---
- this department is inside [[Company A HQ]]
[[Company A HQ note]]
---
tags: #location
---
- is inside a [[City A]]
While developing my location notes I clearly mentioned a company as a location which I later find out it is wrong. Specially because Company A has warehouses in two cities. Fixing now.
[[Company A note]]
- owns various locations
- owns [[Company A HQ note]]
- owns [[Company A Warehouse 1 note]]
- owns [[Company A Warehouse 1 note]]
[[Company A HQ note]]
---
tags: #location
---
- is in [[City A note]]
[[Company A Warehouse 1 note]]
---
tags: #location
---
- is in [[City A note]]
[[Company A Warehouse 2 note]]
---
tags: #location
---
- is in [[City B note]]
- is in [[ABC Industrial Complex note]]
[[ABC Industrial Complex note]]
---
tags: #location
---
- is just outside [[City B note]]
My point is that you need to use sentences as ways to link locations. And maybe use tags to keep track of what is or is not a location. Things change after all.
Also, if you have not done this already, please enable "Show backlinks" to keep track of notes linking to the one you are working on if you have not done that already. It is massively useful.
Oh... That sounds risky!
But, with no experience doing it, I may be missing something.
Have you had no issues with this approach?
No. I really need Production to be stable because other people will be using it. And I do not want my own playing around to cause issues.
I am really considering both @slazer2au@lemmy.world idea of a smaller NAS from the same company and @Zachariah@lemmy.world idea of just creating a new volume in the same NAS.
That is an interesting proposition. And it is a bit cheaper then buying a second NAS while still possibly catching many issues.
Have you done this, out of curiosity?
Good point. I need to consider doing this to make troubleshooting easier.
Also curious if someone had any RAID related issues. Which you will not catch with a 1 or 2 disk NAS since you cannot have RAID 5 there.
I was not clear on why I wanted a production environment. The reason is that I want enough stability in it to be used by family and friends. Preferably without breakages. Immediate usages will be as shared storage, e-book management, game centre to run Minecraft for my kind who lives far away from me., etc. Also, the list of services I will make available in production will vary throughout time.
This is why I mentioned a NAS in production. So that the hardware storage just works. But, at the same time, I really do not have the budget to buy two similar NAS and test things in Sandbox.
I really get your point about having two different envs if I want to have perfect stability. But I was trying to figure out if I could make the Sandbox env a little bit less costly but go 80% of the way in terms of catching issues before breaking Production.
I may just buy a lower model of the same brand but lets see if other people suggest another approach.
I disagree with this assessment BUT I do not disagree with the title.
To explain, LLMs are growing. The same way there is a GPL for code behind a service (GPL v3), there should exist a GPL for code used in LLM training.
That would include both the model AND the scripts and software to create the LLM.
And, it is fine if you, for now, do not have the hardware to run the model. In 1 to 2 years, you will anyway. And, better yet, you can run the LLM to train other, lightweight models.
OpenAI complained that DeepSeek did this, right. So, it should definitvely be a thing that a copyleft GPL v4 should allow.
There is another issue with DataView. You, very quickly bump into slow queries in a medium size vault . I call having 4600 notes a medium size note, to be clear.
One of the limitations of Obsidian linking, and any markdown linking to be precise, is the fact that you cannot define the type of link. So, just use sentences next to the links. This way, you can evolve your locations saying what is
in,next toorpart ofAs an example of evolving your locations and making the connections flexible, imagine that I start working on locations I care about. I am naming the locations and then slapping note content as they evolve.
While developing my location notes I clearly mentioned a company as a location which I later find out it is wrong. Specially because Company A has warehouses in two cities. Fixing now.
My point is that you need to use sentences as ways to link locations. And maybe use tags to keep track of what is or is not a location. Things change after all.
Also, if you have not done this already, please enable "Show backlinks" to keep track of notes linking to the one you are working on if you have not done that already. It is massively useful.