argonaut
-
Posts
47 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Downloads
Store
Gallery
Bug Reports
Documentation
Landing
Posts posted by argonaut
-
-
The badness starts at Jan 25 04:01:07. What do you have configured to run at 04:00? It might be something inside one of you containers.
Is it always at 04:00?
Can you get dmesg output when the system is in a bad state? Also consider a remote syslog facility.
Since you say the system is responding over TCP/IP; ssh in, then run dmesg command look for oops (kernel panic) and oom (out of memory) errors.
-
17 hours ago, darrenyorston said:
What was the problem you were experiencing? I generally use Firefox and noted that I cant see any text when I open the terminal window from the menu bar. There is text there because when I do CTRL+A CTRL+C I can paste into a text document.
Is that the problem you're having? If so where did you make the change to get it to work?
Firefox since at least version 57 (much longer for sure) has had an issue with black text on black background fields in some CSS elements. I know this happens in Gnome, xfce and KDE. It is much worse if you have a dark theme enabled. I don't use Windows so I don't know about that OS. It can be mitigated via a CSS tweak. The Firefox developers say that this is not an issue due to pages written purely in CSS, not due to a Firefox bug, if you consider native input styles to be a feature rather than a bug. See https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1283086
-
xfs does not have a verify write option. In order to accomplish what you are asking for you need to compare two sets of files. There are native Linux tools like md5sum that can accomplish this. Search for "Linux compare contents of two directories" and you should find plenty of examples.
-
You could try a speed test outside of your VM. If performance is slow in Unraid it might point to a different issue. ISPs often manipulate WAN performance when they detect a speed test connecting to speedtest.net. There are many alternatives such as: https://testmy.net/
https://github.com/sivel/speedtest-cli is a CLI speed test tool you should be able to run from the Unraid CLI.
-
I think it was a controller failure. I took out the two HDDs that were suspect and tested them on a separate host running fsck and smartctl; they had no errors. A friend down the street had a controller I used. I replaced my AOC-SASLP-MV8 controllers with a LSI 9305-24i. After ensuring the BIOS and Unraid saw all the devices I followed The 'Trust My Array' Procedure instructions in the Wiki to trust all devices. I then started the array which warned me the parity drive would be overwritten. Unraid forced a parity rebuild and that is currently happening. Data is being written to the parity disk at 152.9 MB/sec and I'm a few percent complete. So things are looking good now.
These controller use Marvell's 88SE6480 Serial ATA Host Controller. All the negative comments about Marvell controllers seem warranted. Save yourself the headache and get rid of them before they bite you.
-
I am running unraid 6.8.1. I think I've run into a situation where I might be royally screwed. Any assistance is appreciated.
I was in the process of replacing a 4TB HDD with a 10 TB HDD. I powered down the array. I then swapped out the physical hard drive and put in the new one. I powered up and all devices were present except for the intentional missing disk 6. Then, I changed disk 6 to point to the new HDD /dev/sdo (sane as before the swap). Unraid informed me that it would erase all data and I proceeded. According to the logs before unraid could even format drive 6 (sdo), drive 7 (sdh) threw errors and and the array failed to start. A kernel panic then ensued, but I think that was from the ATA error. I suspect the Marvell SAS driver has experienced issues like so many others have experienced. I've never has a problem with them until now.
So I shutdown unraid. I then put /dev/sdo back to the previous 4TB HDD. I then booted. The BIOS sees all the devices.
Here is the entry where the array know I'm missing disk 6:
2020-01-21T19:19:56-07:00 nas1 kernel: md: import disk6: (sdo) WDC_WD100EFAX-68LHPN0_JEKAM33N size: 9766436812 2020-01-21T19:19:56-07:00 nas1 kernel: md: import_slot: 6 wrongImports all the disks:
2020-01-21T19:20:06-07:00 nas1 kernel: md6: running, size: 9766436812 blocks 2020-01-21T19:20:06-07:00 nas1 kernel: md7: running, size: 9766436812 blocksWhen unraid tries to mount the disk 7 (md7) filesystem it blows up:
2020-01-21T19:20:11-07:00 nas1 kernel: sas: sas_ata_task_done: SAS error 8a 2020-01-21T19:20:12-07:00 nas1 kernel: sas: Enter sas_scsi_recover_host busy: 1 failed: 1 2020-01-21T19:20:12-07:00 nas1 kernel: sas: ata7: end_device-7:0: cmd error handler 2020-01-21T19:20:12-07:00 nas1 kernel: sas: ata7: end_device-7:0: dev error handler 2020-01-21T19:20:12-07:00 nas1 kernel: sas: ata8: end_device-7:1: dev error handler 2020-01-21T19:20:12-07:00 nas1 kernel: ata7.00: exception Emask 0x0 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x0 action 0x6 2020-01-21T19:20:12-07:00 nas1 kernel: ata7.00: failed command: READ DMA EXT 2020-01-21T19:20:12-07:00 nas1 kernel: ata7.00: cmd 25/00:08:98:ed:ee/00:00:e8:00:00/e0 tag 18 dma 4096 in 2020-01-21T19:20:12-07:00 nas1 kernel: res 01/04:00:a7:97:1a/00:00:e9:00:00/40 Emask 0x12 (ATA bus error) 2020-01-21T19:20:12-07:00 nas1 kernel: sas: ata9: end_device-7:2: dev error handler 2020-01-21T19:20:12-07:00 nas1 kernel: ata7.00: status: { ERR } 2020-01-21T19:20:12-07:00 nas1 kernel: ata7.00: error: { ABRT } 2020-01-21T19:20:12-07:00 nas1 kernel: sas: ata10: end_device-7:3: dev error handler 2020-01-21T19:20:12-07:00 nas1 kernel: ata7: hard resetting link 2020-01-21T19:20:12-07:00 nas1 kernel: sas: ata11: end_device-7:4: dev error handler 2020-01-21T19:20:12-07:00 nas1 kernel: sas: ata12: end_device-7:5: dev error handler 2020-01-21T19:20:12-07:00 nas1 kernel: sas: ata13: end_device-7:6: dev error handler 2020-01-21T19:20:12-07:00 nas1 kernel: sas: sas_ata_task_done: SAS error 8asmartctl thinks the disks are okay.
Now I have disk 6 (sdo) back but unraid says it is a new device and thus has it disabled and disk 7 is not found. Thus 2 failed devices and I am toast. Array will not start and array will not rebuild from parity. disk 6 is in perfect condition with all data still intact, but I don't know how to get unraid to trust it so i can replaced the failed disk 7 (sdh) with a new one and rebuild disk 7 from parity. My next step is take out /dev/sdh and try looking at the filesystem on another host. I would like to get the array back to a working state first and then replace the controllers later (first need to buy some).
Are there any suggestion on how I might escape this quandary? Thanks in advance.
-
I have updated the latest stable 1.2.12 and it has been working for a few hours without issue. Thanks. I need more time and bravery to try going to version 1.4.2. (I suppose it's easy to undo being docker, but I'm in the middle of a parity rebuild so I don't want to risk interrupting that until it is done.) I'm hoping the dockerfile gets updated soon so you can do a build like you were doing previously. Thanks.
-
4 hours ago, Dmitry Spikhalskiy said:
@argonaut Hey, I released a separate tag for you with some dirty hacks, but looks like it's working. You can use the tag spikhalskiy/zerotier:1.4.2 and it will give you the latest Zerotier version. Give it a try if you are in the mood for some experiments
It's an experimental tag and the docker image for this build contains hacks that are not in the Zerotier upstream, so I don't recommend to switch on it until you understand that it could not work for you.
I made a ticket for Zerotier team: https://github.com/zerotier/ZeroTierOne/issues/1013. When it's resolved in the upstream in a reasonable manner I will update the main docker with Zerotier 1.4.2 or newer for everybody.
Geez, I feel kind of special. I should have time in the next couple of days to test. I'll report back.
-
@spikhalskiy Is there any chance you could find some time to update your docker image to at least version 1.4.0.1? It looks like 1.4.2 is the most recent release. This version or higher contains a fix for mDNS that I would benefit from. Thank you for your consideration.
-
11 hours ago, vitaprimo said:
Does this join the ZeroTier network as a client, bridge or controller? (leaving the default config of the container)
By default it will join as a client. This image contains ZeroTierOne https://github.com/zerotier/ZeroTierOne
ZeroTier controllers (the same thing as my.zerotier.com) a lot more configuration. You will also need additional firewall ports opened for the controller to work. See https://github.com/zerotier/ZeroTierOne/tree/master/controller for more information. You can view the template for this image here: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Spikhalskiy/docker-templates/master/zerotier.xml
-
1
-
-
@Dmitry Spikhalskiy I don't have a specific fix in either 1.2.8 or 1.2.10 that I need. Everything is working fine. I was just hoping to maintain the same version across all my zerotier installs. If you are dependent upon an upstream source that's totally cool. Less work for you. Thanks for the quick reply.
-
First, thanks. I love ZeroTier. I appreciate your efforts to build and maintain this Docker image. In your CLI example
./zerotier-cli listnetworkshould be
./zerotier-cli listnetworksper the help file
Available commands: info - Display status info listpeers - List all peers listnetworks - List all networks ...Second, any chance you can find some time to upgrade the version to 1.2.8?
Great work Dmitry.
-
1
-
-
My daughter noticed the default banner and asked for some MLP action. So yes this is now my current banner.
Yeah, OK, we believe you..... lol
Sent from my LG-H815 using Tapatalk
It's tough to say no to a four year old.
-
Yes, it is exactly what you've all be wanting the whole time. My daughter noticed the default banner and asked for some MLP action. So yes this is now my current banner.
-
1
-
(SOLVED)10GB Slow transfer speeds
in General Support
Posted
I think there could be a couple of variables not accounted for in your quest for speed. Having tested on Linux that eliminates the hardware path being an issue. However, have you considered Windows drivers? You might want to experiment with the driver provider and the driver version. I also agree with @jonathanm that any third party software installed on your Windows host is suspect. The only way to test that, is with a clean Windows install without third party applications installed. Windows A/V software and firewall software have the potential to severely impact your performance.