• [6.9.2] Regression in "Incorrect (Annoying) Notifications About Disk Utilization" that was fixed in 6.9.0/6.91


    interwebtech
    • Minor

    This refers to the issue I initially reported back before the 6.9.x series. It was fixed to great acclaim in 6.9 (at least from me lol). As you might recall, a change was made to the disk.cfg that caused it all to reset itself. At least that is how I understood it. The next update to 6.9.1 did not change this; still good with no erroneous warnings. However the update to 6.9.2 has brought it all back and in a much more widespread fashion. Whereas before I had usually only 3 or 4 disks (out of 15 array members) complaining, now I have 13 complaining. I even went so far as redistributing files on 3 disks that had entered the "red" warning stage so that all disks had at least 350GB of free space (all data disks are 8TB) but got another flood of critical warnings of impending doom, then "returned to normal" emails a moment later.

    Let me know if there is anything else you need.

    tower-diagnostics-20210408-2212.zip



    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    10 hours ago, interwebtech said:

    So nobody else is seeing this behavior?

     

    Just the once on the initial update to 6.9.0, but nothing since. I use the fill-up allocation method so I have several disks in the "red zone".

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Just checked my overall disk setting for default warning disk utilization threshold. It was set at 95%. Critical threshold was set at 97%. All my disks report as 95% or less. I've bumped these up to 97% & 99% respectively. Maybe that will quiet the warnings. 

    Feature request: Be able to MUTE these maybe on individual disk level. Reset and show warnings on reboot? That way I can see them when new version but silence them day to day.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    bonienl

    Posted (edited)

    28 minutes ago, interwebtech said:

    Be able to MUTE these maybe on individual disk level.

     

    Already possible. Just set a value of zero for warning and/or alert level.

     

    image.png.10f15d07767bff86a740dbe3abf4b234.png

    Edited by bonienl
    • Like 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    7 hours ago, bonienl said:

     

    Already possible. Just set a value of zero for warning and/or alert level.

     

    image.png.10f15d07767bff86a740dbe3abf4b234.png


    I updated my notification threshold setting to "0" as soon as I read your post. Just now had the second of my twice daily notification floods (setting should have stopped those, right?). The setting does not appear to have the desired effect of turning the notifications off. Diags attached.,

    tower-diagnostics-20210411-2008.zip

    Screenshot_2.png

    Screenshot_1.png

    Edited by interwebtech
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    45 minutes ago, bonienl said:

    Delete the file smart-one.cfg and re-apply the settings.

    Did as you suggested. The smart-one.cfg file does not reappear once applied. Is that a concern?

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    53 minutes ago, interwebtech said:

    Did as you suggested. The smart-one.cfg file does not reappear once applied. Is that a concern?

     

    smart-one.cfg should be created as soon as you make a change for an individual disk.

    In the new format smart-one.cfg should have the disk identifier as the section header. E.g

    [KINGSTON_SA2000M81000G_50026B7683B40AB5]
    hotTemp="50"
    maxTemp="60"

     

    This is working fine for me on 6.9.2 (only outstanding issue is when the identifier has a 'dot'  in the name)

     

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I don't have set individually. I will try that but know that the one for all setting is not obeyed.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I have set the "disk utilization threshold (%)" for disk 1 & disk 2 individually. No smart-one.cfg was created in the config folder. disk.cfg shows it is updated but no other changes.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    On 4/11/2021 at 7:46 AM, interwebtech said:

    So nobody else is seeing this behavior?

     

    On update to 6.9.0 or 6.9.1 (don't know which one) I got warnings/errors for all filled disks. I did close them all.

     

    After that I recognized the wrong temperature limits on my two M.2 disks. I created a bug report because changes on temperature limit did not apply. I was told a workaround and created smart-one.cfg with the entries for these two M.2 disks. This fixed it.

     

    Now on update to 6.9.2 I got warnings/errors for all filled disks again.

     

    For me it's an annoyance, but not worth a new bug report.

     

    Don't know if this matches with your observations.

     

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    As I mentioned in my previous follow up, I changed the setting on disks 1 & 2 at the individual disk level. It did not affect the sending of notifications. However, today I noticed that the wording in the email is slightly different.

    Disks using the general "all disks" setting have the subject:
    Alert [TOWER] - Disk 3 is low on space (96%)

    Those 2 disks I have it set at the individual level have the subject:
    Warning [TOWER] - Disk 2 is high on usage (94%)

     

    Note the diff between warning & alert.

    Also I still don't have a "smart-one.cfg" in my /config folder. Be cool if someone could figure out what changed with 6.9.2 that brought all this back.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    12 hours ago, interwebtech said:

    Also I still don't have a "smart-one.cfg" in my /config folder. Be cool if someone could figure out what changed with 6.9.2 that brought all this back

     

    It is correct that smart-one.cfg is not created when individual disk utilization levels are adjusted. Starting from 6.9 these levels are now stored in disk.cfg. Other variables, such as temperature levels, are still stored in smart-one.cfg.

     

    I made an update to the (background) monitoring script to prevent false positives. In my testing this all looks okay.

     

    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.