Jump to content
  • Unraid OS version 6.8 Release Plan


    limetech

    tldr: If you require hardware support offered by the Linux 5.x kernel then I suggest you remain on 6.8.0-rc7 and wait until 6.9.0-rc1 is published before upgrading.

     

    The "unexpected GSO type" bug is looking to be a show stopper for Unraid 6.8 using Linux kernel 5.3 or 5.4 kernel.  We can get it to happen easily and quickly simply by having any VM running and then also start a docker App where Network Type has been set to "Custom : br0" (in my case) and I've set a static IP for the container or toggle between setting static IP and letting docker dhcp assign one.  There are probably a lot of users waiting for a stable release who will see this issue, and therefore, I don't think we can publish with this bug.

     

    The bug does not occur with any 4.19.x or 4.20.x Linux kernel; but does occur with all kernels starting with 5.0.  This implies the bug was introduced with some code change in the initial 5.0 kernel.  The problem is that we are not certain where to report the bug; it could be a kernel issue or a docker issue.  Of course, it could also be something we are doing wrong, since this issue is not reported in any other distro AFAIK.  We are continuing investigation and putting together a report to submit either to kernel mailing list or as a docker issue.

     

    In any case, an actual fix will probably take quite a bit more time, especially since we are heading into the holidays.  Therefore this is what we plan to do:

     

    For 6.8: revert kernel to 4.19.87 and publish 6.8.0-rc8.  Those currently running stable (6.7.2) will see no loss of functionality because that release is also on 4.19 kernel.  Hopefully this will be last or next to last -rc and then we can publish 6.8 stable.  Note: we cannot revert to 4.20 kernel because that kernel is EOL and has not had any updates in months.

     

    For 6.9: as soon as 6.8 stable is published we'll release 6.9.0-rc1 on next release branch.  This will be exactly the same as 6.8 except that we'll update to latest 5.4 kernel (and "unexpected GSO type" bug will be back).  We will use the next branch to try and solve this bug.

     

    New features, such as multiple pools, will be integrated into 6.10 release, which is current work-in-progress.

     

    We'll wait a day or two to publish 6.8-rc8 with reverted kernel in hopes those affected will see this post first.

    • Like 11
    • Thanks 7


    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    Do i understand correct that i update to RC8 and then stop updating till the GSO bug is fixed?

     

    Thanks!

    Edited by nuhll

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    34 minutes ago, nuhll said:

    Do i understand correct that i update to RC8 and then stop updating till the GSO bug is fixed?

    You can then update to v6.8 final, just don't update to v6.9-rc until that issue is fixed.

    • Like 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    By sticking with the older kernel, will the new Wireguard VPN support still be included in the 6.8 release?  

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    26 minutes ago, Jurykov said:

    By sticking with the older kernel, will the new Wireguard VPN support still be included in the 6.8 release?  

    WireGuard support hasn't been merged into the 5.x kernel yet anyway, so that means limetech would be building it into the kernel themselves. So I assume they will keep doing the same with the latest 4.x kernels.

     

    If you check the release notes for rc8 you'll see it does mention a wireguard update too, so I assume it's still there and will be in the upcoming stable version

    Edited by Dataone

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    Quote

    New features, such as multiple pools

    Just curious: Multiple cache pools and/or multiple arrays.

     

    Edited by hawihoney

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I've probably just got a bad case of the Fridays, but is there any reason why in Chrome when I go to the downloads page 6.8 does not show up but it does in incognito mode and on Firefox? The download still shows up in the Upgrade OS option on my server also. I did see that there was an upgrade done with respect to Firefox in the changelog but I'm assuming that is for the UI within Unraid?

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    Quote

    For 6.9: as soon as 6.8 stable is published we'll release 6.9.0-rc1 on next release branch.  This will be exactly the same as 6.8 except that we'll update to latest 5.4 kernel (and "unexpected GSO type" bug will be back).  We will use the next branch to try and solve this bug.

    Any news on this?

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    So am I to understand that 6.9-rc1 will be essentially just like 6.8-rc7?

     

    Is the GSO bug a concern if you don't use docker at all?

     

    It sounds like the qcow2 corruption bug was corrected in 6.8-rc5 or rc6 so that shouldn't be a concern.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    Quote

    tldr: If you require hardware support offered by the Linux 5.x kernel then I suggest you remain on 6.8.0-rc7 and wait until 6.9.0-rc1 is published before upgrading.

    Hi there!! Just joined and first install of UnRaid...

    I got a lot of trouble with VM+passthrough and after reading a lot of post I'm quite positive it's related to my HW being too recent (ASUS Crossfire VIII + AMD Ryzen 9 3950X + Radeon 5700 XT)... so I was looking for a 5.x linux Kernel and I found this post: what I'm not getting is how to retrieve a RC release... I saw another post referring to a plugin for "next" and "stable" but I guess an "in-between" RC is not there (and the plugins doesn't seem to install... "not reinstalling same version" message is displayed).

     

    Can anybody give me guidance? :)

     

    ...also: do I risk messing up "data" (array conf or content) by "downgrading" to a RC?

     

    Cheers... and Happy New Year!

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    35 minutes ago, sirfaber said:

    what I'm not getting is how to retrieve a RC release... I saw another post referring to a plugin for "next" and "stable" but I guess an "in-between" RC is not there (and the plugins doesn't seem to install... "not reinstalling same version" message is displayed).

     

    I had this problem as well. I don't know if all the links are yanked after new candidates come out or what. I ended up just finding a link to *some* rc candidate somewhere and then changing the values in the link to match the version I wanted. I assume there were links at one point but I couldn't find them!

    • Like 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    On 1/3/2020 at 8:55 AM, sirfaber said:

    Hi there!! Just joined and first install of UnRaid...

    I got a lot of trouble with VM+passthrough and after reading a lot of post I'm quite positive it's related to my HW being too recent (ASUS Crossfire VIII + AMD Ryzen 9 3950X + Radeon 5700 XT)... so I was looking for a 5.x linux Kernel and I found this post: what I'm not getting is how to retrieve a RC release... I saw another post referring to a plugin for "next" and "stable" but I guess an "in-between" RC is not there (and the plugins doesn't seem to install... "not reinstalling same version" message is displayed).

     

    Can anybody give me guidance? :)

     

    ...also: do I risk messing up "data" (array conf or content) by "downgrading" to a RC?

     

    Cheers... and Happy New Year!

    You can select which RC from the USB creator:

     

    usb_flash_creator.png.ab5b18869414c55d884c6e35d81e85bb.png

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Hi @limetech

     

     

    Hi Tom

     

    I am really looking forward to the multiple pools featire in 6.10

    I recently added a Netapp DS4243 (upgrading IOM cards to SAS 6gbps to kind of make it a DS4246) my main unraid server already has 14 drives in it (12 hot swap parity and array disks as well as two SSD's for cache sitting behind the fan wall) so I will never be able to fill my Netapp for the array due to that being a total of 36 Drives 34 for Array and 2 for parity

    I am looking forward and really hoping the multiple pools will not be resctricted to 30 (2 parity and 28 array) total between all pools.  Are you able or will to confirm? I am hoping we will be able to have upto 30 disks and 24 cache drives for each pool.

     

     

    I know this is a big ask to but what about more than 2 parity options??? big arrays like 30 drive and bigger will surely have certain senarios where more than 2 disks fail at one time causing loss of data and unless those of us with huge deep pockets (im a new dad so thats not me lol) would have to create secondary servers or rely on other methods to back these large arrays up in the very rare event of that 3 disk failure senario

    I don't think its unreasonable to allow for 3 to 5 parity as a new max remove it from max array disks if needed when used keep max 30 array/parity like 5 parity-25 array, 3 parity-27 array

    I'm sure you get the picture just wondering if its feasilble or is it too technically challenging to implent?

    i guess in a way if the Multiple pools allows for multiple pools of 30 disk/24 cache etc. then its moot as we could have dual parity for every 28 drives per pool

     

    thanks for reading my ramblings hope to hear from you

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    @Can0nfan: You probably want to post in the Feature Request instead. Based on a recent what new feature do users want poll though, I don't think >2 parity is on the LT new feature roadmap. (multiple array is on the roadmap).

     

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    19 hours ago, Can0nfan said:

    I know this is a big ask to but what about more than 2 parity options??? big arrays like 30 drive and bigger will surely have certain senarios where more than 2 disks fail at one time causing loss of data and unless those of us with huge deep pockets (im a new dad so thats not me lol) would have to create secondary servers or rely on other methods to back these large arrays up in the very rare event of that 3 disk failure senario

    Multiple arrays are great. More than two parity drives is great. But remember that parity is intended for improved availability - it is not a replacement for backup. So you should really, really look into cheap USB disks and copy out your "must not lose" data on them and then store them at parents/children/friends. A single "big oops" with the PSU may kill all drives in the machine. And a fire may kill all data on every piece of hardware in the house. So only use single storage for data you can afford to lose, whatever number of parity drives you may be allowed use of.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    3 hours ago, pwm said:

    Multiple arrays are great. More than two parity drives is great. But remember that parity is intended for improved availability - it is not a replacement for backup. So you should really, really look into cheap USB disks and copy out your "must not lose" data on them and then store them at parents/children/friends. A single "big oops" with the PSU may kill all drives in the machine. And a fire may kill all data on every piece of hardware in the house. So only use single storage for data you can afford to lose, whatever number of parity drives you may be allowed use of.

    there is not a single cheap drive out there I can back all my critical data up with :)

    I currently use three unraid servers for various tasks the shear amount of data i want to back up is over 100TB

    the absolutely must not lose is approximately half of that (bussines data for home based business)

    the other half is stuff i could easily download again if I needed too.  Also not all data would fry since my main server is also connected to an external Disk Shelf where i plan to add my array pool to about 24 then start stacking my cache pool in a decent raid mode that is supported by BTFRS and unRAID. 

    I have a total of 36 Bays available (12 in the server and 24 in the disk shelf) for the one server

     

    the servers are using server grade cases and PSU's not some cheap off the shelf PSU and power is managed by the servers backplane so i would probably lose the backplane before the drives

    I am totally aware i need an off site solution and very very slowly getting all my data to G Suite but the 7MB/sec speed capp to not go over the 750GB/day upload is going to take a while to get the 76TB in one server and 18 in the other and 7 or so in the last server all uploaded

    Edited by Can0nfan
    • Like 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    On 1/6/2020 at 2:30 AM, Skitals said:

    You can select which RC from the USB creator:

     

    usb_flash_creator.png.ab5b18869414c55d884c6e35d81e85bb.png

    Hi there!! Thanks a lot for the suggestion! Unfortunately (?) I'm on Linux... no "native" way to get the wanted release? ...still I can create a simple VM just to run it... :P

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    43 minutes ago, sirfaber said:

    Hi there!! Thanks a lot for the suggestion! Unfortunately (?) I'm on Linux... no "native" way to get the wanted release? ...still I can create a simple VM just to run it... :P

    I don't think the links are published anywhere. Here is the link for rc5, change the build to what you like:

     

    https://s3.amazonaws.com/dnld.lime-technology.com/next/unRAIDServer-6.8.0-rc5-x86_64.zip

     

    • Thanks 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    On 1/8/2020 at 11:33 PM, Skitals said:

    I don't think the links are published anywhere. Here is the link for rc5, change the build to what you like:

     

    
    https://s3.amazonaws.com/dnld.lime-technology.com/next/unRAIDServer-6.8.0-rc5-x86_64.zip

     

    Thanks man!!! That was useful!!!! :)

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Are there any updates on this?  Debating on whether of not to down grade to another OS as my server crashes if i try to start a VM. 

     

    Currently on 6.8.1 

     

    Running:

    Ryzen 3950x

    X570 Asus Prime 

    64 GB of ram 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    59 minutes ago, 08deanr said:

    Are there any updates on this?  Debating on whether of not to down grade to another OS as my server crashes if i try to start a VM. 

     

    Currently on 6.8.1 

     

    Running:

    Ryzen 3950x

    X570 Asus Prime 

    64 GB of ram 

    Do you have a link to another post with the problem?

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    no i dont, I saw this about the issues with the Kernel first. Was going to wait on reporting it fully until after this was fixed as the VM's are not critical to my usage currently.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Any idea on when we will see 6.9-RC1? There have been enough updates/bug fixes and security issues that I don't feel comfortable rolling back to 6.8-RC7, but I really need the new kernel version.

    • Like 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    15 minutes ago, eagle470 said:

    Any idea on when we will see 6.9-RC1? There have been enough updates/bug fixes and security issues that I don't feel comfortable rolling back to 6.8-RC7, but I really need the new kernel version.

    Yeah I'm excited for the improved monitoring for temps and stuff.

    Edited by Jerky_san
    • Like 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Status Definitions

     

    Open = Under consideration.

     

    Solved = The issue has been resolved.

     

    Solved version = The issue has been resolved in the indicated release version.

     

    Closed = Feedback or opinion better posted on our forum for discussion. Also for reports we cannot reproduce or need more information. In this case just add a comment and we will review it again.

     

    Retest = Please retest in latest release.


    Priority Definitions

     

    Minor = Something not working correctly.

     

    Urgent = Server crash, data loss, or other showstopper.

     

    Annoyance = Doesn't affect functionality but should be fixed.

     

    Other = Announcement or other non-issue.