Ah, RP, so
Bottol of wotta

Are you the
Buh’oh ah wa’ah
Or
Bah’ol ah wa’er
Or
Bo’el a wo’ah
Type of English?

“have”?
I think you mean 'ave, mate, innit?

Sorry I misread when you said “library” for some reason I thought you meant “external library”

The problem that I’m trying to solve and I think OP is also trying to solve, is that they want the files to be on their NAS because it is high capacity, redundant, and backed up, but many users have access to the NAS, so they cannot rely on immich alone to provide access permissions, they need access permissions on the files themselves.

I solved this by having a separate share for every user, and then mounting that user’s share on their library (storage label).
It sounds like OP wants a single share, so having correct file ownership is important to restrict file access to the correct users who are viewing the filesystem outside of immich.

Not sure what you mean by your last paragraph, how do you assign a share to individual files (assume you mean directories) outside of immich’s need for storage?

Library access won’t allow upload, this will.

My knowledge here isn’t super deep, but it seems like you can do mapping per-share-per-ip, which means you can say “all file access coming from the immich host to this share will act as this user” which I think is fine if that share belongs to that user, and you don’t have anything else coming from that host to that share which you want to act as a different user. Which are very big caveats.

Preface

I got excited and didn’t properly read your post before I wrote out a huge reply. I thought your problem was the per-user mapping to different locations on your NAS or to different shares, but its specifically file ownership.
whoops.

Leaving this here anyways, in case someone finds it helpful.
I kinda address file ownership at the end, but I don’t think its really what you were looking for because it depends on every user having their own share.

Prerequisites

1. you need to be using Storage Templates.
2. you’re willing to change the storage labels for all existing users
   • if not, then change the storage labels for all users to something temporary and run the migration job before you begin. You’ll change it back later.
3. you’re willing to switch to NFS instead of samba, where each user gets their own share.
   • might not actually be necessary, but its what I use, so YMMV

Configuration

Volumes

In docker, you’ll need to set up an external NFS volume for every user. I use portainer to manage my docker stacks, and its pretty easy to set up NFS volumes. I’m not sure how to do it with raw docker, but I dont think its complicated.

Compose

in your docker compose files, include something like this

services:
  immich-server:
    # ...
    volumes:
      - ${UPLOAD_LOCATION}:/data
      - /etc/localtime:/etc/localtime:ro
     - type: volume
        source: user1-share
        target: /data/library/user1-intended-storage-label
        volume:
          subpath: path/to/photos/in/user1/share
    - type: volume
        source: user2-share
        target: /data/library/user2-intended-storage-label
        volume:
          subpath: path/to/photos/in/user2/share
    # and so on for every user
  # ...

volumes:
  model-cache:
  user1-share:
    external: true
  user2-share:
    external: true
  # and so on for every user

There are 3 things about this setup:

1. it does not scale automatically. this is fine as long as you don’t intend to be adding/removing users often.
2. it is only saving the photos and videos. all thumbnails and transcoded videos, etc, get saved to ${UPLOAD_LOCATION}. For me this is fine, I dont want to pollute my NAS with a bunch of transient data, but if you want that info then for every user, in addition to the target: /data/library/user1 target you’ll also need a target: /data/thumbs/user1, target: /data/encoded-video/user1, etc.
3. If there is already data at the target, when you mount this volume it will mask that data. This is why it is important that no users exist with that storage label prior to this change, else that data will get hidden.

You may also want to add similar volumes for external libraries (I gave every user an external “archive” library for their old photos) like this:

    - type: volume
        source: user1-share
        target: /unique/path/to/this/users/archive
        volume:
          subpath: path/to/photo/archive/on/share

and then you’ll need to go and add that target as an external library in the admin setup.
and once immich allows sharing external libraries (or turning external libraries into sharable albums) I’ll also include a volume for a shared archive.

Migrate

redeploy, change your user storage labels to match the targets, and run the migration job (or create the users with matching storage labels).

File ownership

I honestly don’t think its important, as long as your user has full access to the files, its fine. But if you insist then you have a separate share for every user and set up the NFS server for that share to squash all to that share’s user. Its a little less secure, but you’ll only be allowing requests from that single IP, and there will only be a request from a single user from that server anyways.
Synology unfortunately doesn’t support this, they only allow squashing to admin or guest (or disable squashing).

Any size is fine if the other side doesn’t know they’re coming to a gun fight

What you’re looking for is probably something like certificate authentication, or mTLS. It exists, but it’s kind of a pain to set up on client devices so it’s not very common.

What’s more common and easier to set up and is nearly the same thing, is passkey authentication. Same in-flight security characteristics, but you typically need to pass a simple challenge for your device to unlock it.

There are a bunch of self-hosted auth options for both

I wanna try matrix, but it’s crazy to me that no clients, even the official clients, support all the features. It really makes me hesitate lol

Yeah, that was the incident that really made me look back on his previous action with fresh eyes and reconsider my opinion of him.

Like you said, it went downhill fast after that

Jastate?
Odd name

I don’t get it, and I feel like I’m probably not supposed to.
Kind of a shame. I guess I’ll just get led astray

Thank you!

This is almost exactly my motivation when I recently started my homelab journey. A bit of privacy, but what pushed me over the edge is that I was supporting these anti-social corporations with my money or data, when they went fully mask-off.

Your argument you haven’t made is backed up by math textbooks you haven’t provided written for children.

What is it that you want addressed?

How can that specific order of operations be a law of mathematics if it only applies to infix notation, and not prefix or postfix notations? Laws of mathematics are universal across notations.

Show me a textbook that discusses other notations and also says that order of operations is a law of mathematics.
You don’t have it, and you also aren’t a maths teacher, or a teacher at all. Just because you say it a lot doesn’t make it true.

Dr pepper baby
It’s good and nice 🎵

You forgot

Dndbsisudhdhsishdsjsosjsej makeup

Man, this whole post has been embarrassing for you. Oof.

I can’t help but notice youve once again failed to address prefix and postfix notations.
And that you’ve not actually made any argument other than “nuh uh”
Not to mention the other threads you’ve been in. Yikes.

We can all tell you’re not a maths teacher.

To a “maths teacher”

Yeah sure
A “teacher” who doesn’t know that all lessons are simplifications that get corrected at a higher level, and confidentiality refers to children’s textbook as an infallible source of college level information.

A “teacher” incapable of differentiating between rules of a convention and the laws of mathematics.

A “teacher” incapable of looking up information on notations of their own specialization, and synthesizing it into coherent response.

Uh huh, sounds totally legit

They don’t, they apply to all notations

I love how confident you are about something you clearly have no knowledge of.
Adorable.

Well, you made a good effort. At least if we’re judging by word count.

You can’t be underestimated