itimpi

I still think that passing the GPU through to the VM in such a case is likely to give a better experience. You then use the correct Windows drivers for the graphic card within the VM. Since then Windows is managing the graphics and since graphics and is not being emulated you get optimum graphics performance. You then run the Unraid console from a browser session within the VM, and quite likely have the VM set to autostart when Unraid starts. This is not an uncommon setup.

How do you run Remote Desktop directly on the Unraid server (which is what I think is what was wanted)? If connecting from another machine then I agree VNC is not the best way to go. I personally use noMachine in preference to Remote Desktop.

You do not need to format the drives in UD (although it will not do any harm). Make sure, though that in UD you first remove the existing partitions.

Not sure this is the answer 😕. I read the OP as running a VNC session on the server itself. Perhaps what is needed is to pass a GPU through to the VM so it can directly control the video output by-passing Unraid.

That message is always valid! Does the disk have existing partitions then removing them may help. If you post your system’s diagnostics zip file we can see the underlying detail that is triggering this and advice on best way forward.

it is worth pointing out that the commonest cause for a LAN link downgrading to 100 Mbps is not all 4 twisted pairs in the cable making an end-to-end link. The 100 Mbps link only requires 2 of the twisted pairs to be working. Can be the cable itself, or something like a pin on a port is plugged into not making proper contact.

This is unlikely as the plugin does not start the Automatic checks - that is being done by Unraid itself. The plugin is never responsible for initiating checks - just for providing the possibility of running them in increments.

First time I have heard of this and many people have a share called ‘data’. Might be worth posting your system’s diagnostics zip file so we can check there is no obvious configuration issue triggering the warning.

Yes. The number of parity drives does not affect performance (once you have even 1), nor does the number of data drives. Yes within the limit of 28 data drives. Support for multiple 'Unraid' type arrays is a roadmap item although we have no idea of the likely timescale for this support actually being released as it has been on the roadmap for quite some time. When that support arrives it will probably be treated as just another 'pool' type. You can have multiple pools using either BTRFS or ZFS file systems. so that is another way of utilising extra drives. Note that 'caching' is technically a function associated with User Shares and reference a pool of any name (i.e it does not need to be called 'cache'). Its purpose is to act a staging post for writes to the array to improve perceived performance. You might also want a pool to host docker containers and/or VMs with maximum performance. This can optionally be the same pool that you used for 'caching' but that is up to how you configure thins.

OK. If you look directly at the relevant drive(s) do files for the share show up?

Better to do it via the GUI as that ensures the correct device name is used. Click on the device on the Main tab to get to the check.

It might be worth running a check filesystem on disk2 in case file system level corruption is what is causing the share to not show up.

You configure where it is to live. In your case it can be on any pool/array The same applies to 'caching' which is configured at the User Share level, but if you have an all SSD pool /array being used for the data then caching is probably irrelevant It only make sense when you have a traditional Unraid parity protected array using HDD to improve perceived performance for new files.

Not quite sure what you mean? You need the default parity check enabled to specify when to start them in the first place. What you do NOT want is the Cumulative option set if the Parity Check Tuning plugin is handling increments. Do you by any chance have the Cumulative option set in the standard settings? I add a check for that when you amend the plugin settings, but would not pick up it being set later - perhaps something I need to check for and warn about?

It might be worth running the Extended SMART test. The diagnostics shows that it looks like it is only the Short SMART test that has been successful.

These notifications are only meant to be displayed if both a parity check is in operation AND you have set the plugin setting "Send notifications for mover or backup running" to Yes. However a bug in the current release means they get displayed when they should not. This will be fixed for the release I am working on. No idea about that. The notification is coming from the built-in code not from the plugin. What version of Unraid are you running so I can see if I can reproduce?

Not a simple answer as it can depend on what the client wants 😊. By default Unraid supports connections using SMB 2 or higher. It will also support SMB 1 if you enable NetBios support.

I think you meant an ‘EFI-‘ folder needs renaming to just ‘EFI’ 😊

When you do this you get an explicit message telling you that you will not be able to rebuild data.

The commonest causes of unexpected reboots is the RAM and PSU, both of which can go bad even though they were working OK earlier.

You can also use the Parity Check Tuning plugin to get even more control.

Not sure I even understand what you are asking for 😞 fedora is an OS in its own right and has nothing to do with the Unraid OS.

Several of your disks show in their SMART information: Formatted with type 2 protection You will need to remove this to get them usable. Should be able to google the steps required

Do you mean the Extended SMART test? That is the only one that thoroughly tests a drive.