BRiT

Until you post up diagnostics after your VMs are killed no one can answer accurately about your situation.

http://www.linuxatemyram.com/ Unused RAM is worthless RAM.

Were you using /mnt/cache/share or /mnt/usr/share mappings for your VM image settings?

Freedos environment is what Rufus installs for a dos-bootable disk. Info on Freedos: http://www.freedos.org/

I hope these dl links work: http://www.freedos.org/software/?prog=xgrep points off to http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/util/file/xgrep/ of which you want the executable so that's http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/util/file/xgrep/xgrp103x.zip Basic command to find the SAS Address from the text file it generated earlier (haven't parsed it out to only be the address value): xgrep.com Address ADAPTERS.TXT

Quick suggestion is to add xgrep.com dos executable to the toolset and use that against Adapters.txt to display the Address line for the lsi cards.

- Reserved for Reaction -

As has been pointed out, I dont know where this notion that you have to change the application in order to run in a Docker, but that is outright wrong and pure FUD.

Your bios might support a schedule of when to wake.

As you indicated you don't have a SSD Cache drive since it is not assigned.

Any significant slowdowns in dual parity over single parity comes from CPU calculations, especially with older low powered Atoms or AMD cpus.

As to point numner 2, that depends on how many disks and how many cores are available. I have far more cores available than disks, its a factor of 8 to 1. A choice of using multithreaded algorothm could drastically help in my situation. My system has 32 cores and 4 data disks.

Don't thank me yet. There's going to be a couple hundred posts now about why powerdown is listed as incompatible. ( I've already got your explanation post bookmarked ) It's all CHBMB's fault, right ...

Consolidate Notifications Functionality to Single Summary Alert Is it possible to instead of seeing the multitude of new notifications to limit it to A single notification saying "You have # new Notifications. [Click To View in Notifications]". Sometimes when I return to the system I have dozens upon dozens of Notifications that effectively makes the UI unusable while it's rendering all of them. It would be better to display the single notification alert indicating I have 200 new notifications. Then I can navigate to the notification area to view them. Naturally, this limit on maximum number of notifications to display would be user configurable. { Cross Posted from: http://lime-technology.com/forum/index.php?topic=51769.0 }

So using those terms, did 6.1.9 go EOS 6 months ago when they stopped supplying bug fixes and security updates then?

Ah, you're back to the usual update schedule If only unRaid could be on the Squid update schedule when it comes to bugs and security uodates.

Not going to happen. Once 6.2 'stable' is released So we won't have a stable release including security updates until sometimes in the Fall of 2016 or Winter of 2017?

The initial post was made nearly 1 year ago in September 2015 and its obvious that they havent followed it. There's no need to wait for 6.2 to release to see the methodology isnt being followed and we're obviously not getting security updates.

To play Devil's Advocate, I'd like to give a reason for creating 6.1.10: 6.2 runs a new version of the kernel and some of the stock OS commands returns data in a different format than the same command in 6.1.x. Programs that expect data to exist in a certain spot from these modified commands are now broken under 6.2. My disk speed script in my sig doesn't function under 6.2 for example but does for every version from 5.0 to 6.1.9 One advantage to UNRAID is it's versatility. There are many released scripts & plugins available but who knows how many custom scripts are out there that people have written/acquired for their own use that may be broken under 6.2 forcing them to roll back if they're critical to them. it does not seem logical you suggest they maintain two parallel versions 6.1.x and x being 6.2 in a few days and so on sometime 6.1.x has to stop being developed when it was released sounds fair so all the development goes to the new versions Security updates are not development. When you only have 1 released product version you need to keep security patches provided for them in a timely manner. In this situation the only supported released product version is 6.1.x. And it absolutely needs to be maintained with proper security fixes.

Unless unRAID uses accuracy including milliseconds in the parity check start and parity check end times, the difference of just 1001 milliseconds could result in a swing of 2.7 MB/s. Theoretical differences when time delta is 1001 milliseconds, could could look like a run of 1 seconds, or 2 seconds. Start @ 00:00:00.000 End @ 00:00:01.001 Reported if not using millis: 1 second Start @ 00:00:00.999 End @ 00:00:02:000 Reported if not using millis: 2 seconds

This shouldn't matter because with the --cpuset it should not allow the container to use more than two cores Right, but try setting it anyways just to ensure even without cpuset that REPAIR doesnt take up more than you want it to.

I dont know if theres params for extraction, but from memory there are params for PAR with NZBGet. Have you configured them as to how many threads it should use? It might be part of the extra params for PAR.

Try switching to NZBGet.

Just a silly question which I'm sure has been considered and taken care of... Before the very first test starts, does the script have a step to manually spin up each and every drive to make sure drive spin-up doesn't impact the measured test?

Has TeamViewer ever figured out how thousands of their users were hacked or breached? Last time I heard of TeamViewer was not good news and made it seem like it was completely insecure.