Caennanu

hmmm, i'm using https://hub.docker.com/r/ich777/teamspeak but the link for 'support' on the docker leads me to this thread?

update: i don't know why, but when using the host option with teamspeak dockers, i keep getting time outs on the clients. Didn't have this before. From the point i assigned it a dedicated ip, it has been stable for 24 hours now . . . Any idea why this is @ich777? ( i assume its an unraid thing, but can't be sure)

To test i have removed the orphan image. Issue persists Could it be caused by the bond i have made with the 2 nics?

I currently have one orphaned, but that is because i recently updated sickchill to latest. Had the issue before the orphan tho.

Scratch that, it appears teamspeak logs are always in UTC time format . . . why oh why you be disconnecting?

Hey Ich, I been having an issue with teamspeak. Multiple dockers actually not just yours distro. Just like yours better For some reason, the timestamps in the logs are 2 hours behind, and i keep having disconnect issues with the server. I'm thinking it is about the timestamps. I am in GMT +2 but it seems to be taking UTC. The teamspeak dockers all have this, the other dockers do not. Have you, or any1 else, got any clue why the time is set to UTC and if this could cause constant disconnects with random intervals? Error message in logs: INFO |PktHandler |1 |Dropping client 2 because of ping timeout 19 0 0

so . . . so far, i've decreased the size of libvirt and docker.img. I have added a docker infront of the rest with 120 seconds wait time to start the next docker. So far issue persists. (some dockers start, but most don't and when manually starting them you get the message, no such container, restarting docker from settings and everything works as it should) updated diagnostics attached. Caennanu2-diagnostics-20210820-1240.zip

Yeah that is what i originally thought. Unfortunately i have more than one container 😛 Thanks for the clarification

Oh i thought it worked the other way around. The next container has to wait x amount before starting. This makes much more sence 😛

That makes sence. I've reduced libvirt to 2gb and docker.img to 20gb Is there any way i can put a pause on the entire docker service before starting up? So unraid has time to start the bridges? (as i don't seem to have the issue with bridges on VM's)

I have lancache that is the only thing they could run thru and starts first. Other than that all network related things are handled by my router. The only thing i can think off is that the bridges for the Vlan's are started at a later time than the dockers. Ill increase the wait time for lancache.

Don't have a current backup but easy to make. But do you really think that because they're large they are causing these issues? (i can always try ofcourse)

its been like this for over a year, i know i had issues with dockers taking rather large amounts of space in the past, maybe that's why i still have it set to 50G. Currently there's 11GB in use if i'm to believe the scrubber.

No particular reason i can think off currently. . .

Looks like the dockers start quicker than the vlan's are set.

dohh my bad, obviously i ment my docker.img file. (p.s. i'm aware of the one memory module acting up) Caennanu-diagnostics-20210818-0901.zip

Gday all, It's been bugging me for a while, but more often than not, i'm getting a message 'no such container' after i restart (yes gracefully) my unraid server. I had this on my Ryzen platform and now on my Epyc platform. I have 'rebuild' my libvirt file a couple of times, i have done parity checks. Heck i even moved my docker image from the array to cache to a mounted volume, but the problem persists. Any pointers where it could be? Is it maybe that my array isn't fully 'booted' when docker starts? if so, can i delay starting the docker service somehow? Turning docker service off and then on again fixes the issue

If anybody has any idea's how to properly mount a disk or share via the unraid VM, please let me know.

So, after some searching, i found someone who added an msize command. This turns the 2mb into 80mb. Which is a lot better, but still nowhere near the 600mb i should be getting. With msize of 512000 i'm getting 150MB/s. which is atleast better than loading it up with nfs and loading my network with double filetransfers (CCTV video feeds to server, to be read back and saved over the network on a share)

Good day all, First of all, i'm a newb in regards to anything Linux based. Even tho i'm setting up a ubuntu server. I'm running into an issue. So far i have managed to mount a share in ubuntu 20.04 using fstab. I've mounted the same share over network via NFS and i've mounted it via the Hyperviser. Next thing ofcourse was to do write testing, for this i used the dd command: sudo dd if=dev/zero of=/mnt/share/testfile bs=100M count=1 oflag=dsync. When i test it via this method, i'm getting write speeds of a whopping 2MB/s! (yes, thats sarcasm) When i do the same test, but this time the target of the nfs mounted share, i get 100MB/s, which is ofcourse the limit of a 1gbps network connection. So i decided to do the same, but this time the target is simply /mnt. Now i'm getting write speeds up to 600MB/s. So, from the array point of view, everything is configured correctly, i'm properly using the cache when doing the last command, just can't find the file anywhere but within the VM (which makes sence, as it should be). Now the question: How can i improve the 2MB/s write speed more towards the 600 range, which i can clearly achieve? Fstab: unraidshare /unraidshare 9p trans=virtio,version=9p2000.L,_netdev,rw 0 0

Honestly, i think this docker and its support is dead.

Gday kind people! I just now found out you have a shinobi template, that pulls the original. However, its stated that you can enable hardware acceleration by adding --runtime=nvidia. and adding the proper parameters. I have done this, but i don't get Cuvid as accelerator at start up. Any idea what's happening? (p.s. i've checked spelling and all that, parameters are correct)

@0sense i have had similar issues and i haven't really worked it out myself (on my ryzen system, which i'm nolonger using). The thing i noticed is that when the gpu is in use by unraid itsself for primary video output, the dockers won't see it or be able to use it. With a little bit of tinkering you have an odd chance that a VM will work with it when exporting the rom and loading it in with the VM, but this for me was a hit and miss. I'm not entirely versed with intel cpu, but i believe that cpu has an IGP. Are you perhaps able to set that as primary graphics adapter in the BIOS? (you might need to hook up a monitor to it, or a dummy plug) Next to that, there is another thing that was suggested i would do, i had to turn off whql support in the bios to turn on some function that would allow first gpu detection via chipset rather than first pci-e slot, but forgot what its called. Will search for it, but maybe someone else knows it out the top of their head? -- edit: Correction, as i had to look it up. By turning on WHQL on the MSI mainboard, it turned CSM off. Which allowed me to use the graphic cards in proper order.

Ahh ok gotcha. Funny thing is, i knew how to, just not why to

@ich777 okay, can do that. Binding, Never really read up on that what its actually for. And good to know. But maybe its similar for Hellraiser? No no, the GT710's are nothing more than offloading basic graphics for the VM's from the cpu, while having the option to hook up a monitoring monitor to them (CCTV montage in a room near where the server is). The 1050 is for Docker containers. And well, i tagged you on that one the other day. So that works