boomam

Members
  • Content Count

    111
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

5 Neutral

About boomam

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. You are missing the other part of my point that lends greater context to it Anyway, do we know for sure yet if the folder based method is a viable solution? Or another workaround?
  2. I get that, but considering it was listed as 'resolved' in the 6.9 update - if its still an issue, then there should be a clear migration path that doesn't require users to faff with moving and changing docker around to remove the issue from Unraid's point of view, to work around the core docker issue. Instead, I, like others, have rebuilt the pool to a new partition map as suggested, incurring the time cost of doing so, but the issue persists regardless, so its ultimately been a pointless endeavor that would have been best described as a 'workaround'.
  3. I'm amazed that after being 'fixed' in 6.9, that this is still an issue. So is the new advice now to 'fix' by using Docker folder paths instead of IMG?- at least until the next 'fix' comes around?
  4. Hi. Is this not a browser installation of OpenRCT? RE: forwarded ports, no, there is no need to as i am inside my own LAN.
  5. Does anyone know if there's any clearer documentation for the OpenRCT2 container? The Docker hub page, and the Unraid template, say this on one of the variables - "The hash of the admin user (you find it on the client computer in the 'user-data/keys' folder from OpenRCT2" What on earth does this mean!? What client is it referring too, and what path to that folder? I'm guessing a lack of this variable is caused this error too: "Unable to connect to master server". Thanks!
  6. I would guess, that once setup in the new 6.9 options, that it would be the same as rebuilding your docker.img - as in, resetting up your templates/downloading images again. Just this time it writes directly to the file system. Once I've got all the other bugs with 6.9 RC2 worked out, I may give it a go at the weekend, setup a share just for the docker images and see how it goes.
  7. How are you getting those Tb amounts in the attribute screen?
  8. That could be an advantage i suppose for those containers that by default, write their temp files into their own image, such as NextCloud. May have to experiment once i've got everything behaving again.
  9. Thanks. Both pool and docker.img are formatted at BTRFS, and the user script workaround on array start for 6.8.3 has been disabled. I assume from a write amplification bug, that this is as 'solved' as it gets? Or is there more for me to do?
  10. Q: Post 6.9 RC2 upgrade, should we rebuilding/formatting the cache as XFS or BTRFS? Equally, what about the new settings in docker for data-root format? XFX or BTRFS?
  11. Group folders is an addin/plugin, just reinstall it.
  12. Yup. Confirmed myself too. To help anyone, assuming standard paths - 1. ssh to server/use web interface for shell (ssh user@IP) rm /mnt/user/appdata/nextcloud/nginx/site-confs/default Then restart the container.
  13. That's fine, its a small price to pay to ensure that the container/built files, are otherwise 'standard'. I'll keep an eye out for the next update, and delete the file then.
  14. Question, your last post mentioned "We plan to add this soon." - Forgive me, but are we to take this to mean that you are one of the LS.io dev's, and that this change will come in an update/by-default sometime soon? As if so, then i'm just gonna leave it be, and it can fix itself whenever that update rolls around.