yaksaredabomb

Members
  • Posts

    11
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Converted

  • Gender
    Undisclosed

yaksaredabomb's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/14)

0

Reputation

  1. All 3 drives are fine, no issues seen. The white label drive looks like a WD, same SMART attributes. Thanks very much, RobJ! I appreciate your time and the good news didn't hurt either . Have a good one!
  2. Hello, I'm hoping someone will help take a look at the preclear results for these three drives to see if there is anything I should be concerned about or keep an eye on. Only 4 attachments are allowed so I've attached the reports, starts, and finishes together in one zip file "preclearFiles.zip" The 4TB drives seem to have more SMART attributes in the report than the 6TB, even though the 6TB's "finish" file says its SMART support is available and enabled. Maybe there is something extra I need to do in the BIOS or preclear switches? The 4TB drives are both Seagate but the 6TB drive is a "white label" with just a one year warranty so I'm more concerned about it. Thank you for anyone's input! Without further ado, here are the contents of the reports: ST4000DM000-1F2168 W3002X5W ========================================================================1.15 == invoked as: /boot/preclear_disk.sh -c 3 /dev/sdc == ST4000DM000-1F2168 W3002X5W == Disk /dev/sdc has been successfully precleared == with a starting sector of 1 == Ran 3 cycles == == Using :Read block size = 8388608 Bytes == Last Cycle's Pre Read Time : 9:51:06 (112 MB/s) == Last Cycle's Zeroing time : 8:45:43 (126 MB/s) == Last Cycle's Post Read Time : 23:15:30 (47 MB/s) == Last Cycle's Total Time : 32:02:14 == == Total Elapsed Time 105:31:57 == == Disk Start Temperature: 29C == == Current Disk Temperature: 29C, == ============================================================================ ** Changed attributes in files: /tmp/smart_start_sdc /tmp/smart_finish_sdc ATTRIBUTE NEW_VAL OLD_VAL FAILURE_THRESHOLD STATUS RAW_VALUE Raw_Read_Error_Rate = 111 119 6 ok 38120536 Seek_Error_Rate = 64 62 30 ok 2892140 Spin_Retry_Count = 100 100 97 near_thresh 0 End-to-End_Error = 100 100 99 near_thresh 0 High_Fly_Writes = 90 95 0 ok 10 Airflow_Temperature_Cel = 70 71 45 near_thresh 30 Temperature_Celsius = 30 29 0 ok 30 No SMART attributes are FAILING_NOW 0 sectors were pending re-allocation before the start of the preclear. 0 sectors were pending re-allocation after pre-read in cycle 1 of 3. 0 sectors were pending re-allocation after zero of disk in cycle 1 of 3. 0 sectors were pending re-allocation after post-read in cycle 1 of 3. 0 sectors were pending re-allocation after zero of disk in cycle 2 of 3. 0 sectors were pending re-allocation after post-read in cycle 2 of 3. 0 sectors were pending re-allocation after zero of disk in cycle 3 of 3. 0 sectors are pending re-allocation at the end of the preclear, the number of sectors pending re-allocation did not change. 0 sectors had been re-allocated before the start of the preclear. 0 sectors are re-allocated at the end of the preclear, the number of sectors re-allocated did not change. ============================================================================ ST4000DM000-1F2168 Z3006399 ========================================================================1.15 == invoked as: /boot/preclear_disk.sh -c 3 /dev/sdb == ST4000DM000-1F2168 Z3006399 == Disk /dev/sdb has been successfully precleared == with a starting sector of 1 == Ran 3 cycles == == Using :Read block size = 8388608 Bytes == Last Cycle's Pre Read Time : 9:37:50 (115 MB/s) == Last Cycle's Zeroing time : 8:32:32 (130 MB/s) == Last Cycle's Post Read Time : 22:51:46 (48 MB/s) == Last Cycle's Total Time : 31:25:18 == == Total Elapsed Time 103:29:49 == == Disk Start Temperature: 29C == == Current Disk Temperature: 30C, == ============================================================================ ** Changed attributes in files: /tmp/smart_start_sdb /tmp/smart_finish_sdb ATTRIBUTE NEW_VAL OLD_VAL FAILURE_THRESHOLD STATUS RAW_VALUE Raw_Read_Error_Rate = 114 111 6 ok 74700168 Seek_Error_Rate = 63 61 30 ok 2620745 Spin_Retry_Count = 100 100 97 near_thresh 0 End-to-End_Error = 100 100 99 near_thresh 0 High_Fly_Writes = 93 97 0 ok 7 Airflow_Temperature_Cel = 70 71 45 near_thresh 30 Temperature_Celsius = 30 29 0 ok 30 No SMART attributes are FAILING_NOW 0 sectors were pending re-allocation before the start of the preclear. 0 sectors were pending re-allocation after pre-read in cycle 1 of 3. 0 sectors were pending re-allocation after zero of disk in cycle 1 of 3. 0 sectors were pending re-allocation after post-read in cycle 1 of 3. 0 sectors were pending re-allocation after zero of disk in cycle 2 of 3. 0 sectors were pending re-allocation after post-read in cycle 2 of 3. 0 sectors were pending re-allocation after zero of disk in cycle 3 of 3. 0 sectors are pending re-allocation at the end of the preclear, the number of sectors pending re-allocation did not change. 0 sectors had been re-allocated before the start of the preclear. 0 sectors are re-allocated at the end of the preclear, the number of sectors re-allocated did not change. ============================================================================ WL6000GSA6454 WOL240346597 ========================================================================1.15 == invoked as: /boot/preclear_disk.sh -c 2 /dev/sda == WL6000GSA6454 WOL240346597 == Disk /dev/sda has been successfully precleared == with a starting sector of 1 == Ran 2 cycles == == Using :Read block size = 8388608 Bytes == Last Cycle's Pre Read Time : 15:43:39 (109 MB/s) == Last Cycle's Zeroing time : 13:00:39 (132 MB/s) == Last Cycle's Post Read Time : 36:20:24 (47 MB/s) == Last Cycle's Total Time : 49:22:02 == == Total Elapsed Time 114:41:28 == == Disk Start Temperature: 30C == == Current Disk Temperature: 29C, == ============================================================================ ** Changed attributes in files: /tmp/smart_start_sda /tmp/smart_finish_sda ATTRIBUTE NEW_VAL OLD_VAL FAILURE_THRESHOLD STATUS RAW_VALUE Unknown_Attribute = 4 0 0 near_thresh 85883701621 Temperature_Celsius = 123 122 0 ok 29 No SMART attributes are FAILING_NOW 0 sectors were pending re-allocation before the start of the preclear. 0 sectors were pending re-allocation after pre-read in cycle 1 of 2. 0 sectors were pending re-allocation after zero of disk in cycle 1 of 2. 0 sectors were pending re-allocation after post-read in cycle 1 of 2. 0 sectors were pending re-allocation after zero of disk in cycle 2 of 2. 0 sectors are pending re-allocation at the end of the preclear, the number of sectors pending re-allocation did not change. 0 sectors had been re-allocated before the start of the preclear. 0 sectors are re-allocated at the end of the preclear, the number of sectors re-allocated did not change. ============================================================================ preclearFiles.zip
  3. Yes! I'd go for this. Although I like being able to use all my old drives with Unraid, including 160GB and 250GB IDE drives, it's getting to the point where reason says it's hardly worth it for the hassle in added drive count. But then what else do I do with them (other than art projects or screwdriver holders)? I'd guess a trade-in program could have other benefits to the manufacturer besides the raw materials - like enchancing customer loyalty. The profit from increased future sales may even outweight the value of the materials being recycled. Heck, even if it *cost* them money to accept old drives in exchange for a manufacturer mail-in rebate (or similar) on purchase of a new drive the new sales and boost to brand image and good-will may still make the program worth it.
  4. Thanks for confirming! Sounds great and I'm excited to get my build going the first chance I get! Have a good one.
  5. Thanks much garycase! So just to be sure I understand, in your opinion the modified time issue shouldn't be much of a big deal for someone looking to run the stock build at home with relatively simple configuration (a few multi-disk shares and two users besides root)? Thanks again for the advice and now for humoring my double-check!
  6. I'm using several different versions rc4, rc10 and rc15a. Until the next RC comes out or 5.0 final "Which should be soon" based on other posts I would recommend rc12a right now rc15a has a bug that makes me want to roll back to rc12a I just haven't yet because I've been expecting the next RC to be released. It has been tested in private beta and removes the problems with rc15a and earlier RC's but keeps everything else. I'm in a similar position to njm5785. Trying hard to be patient but I'm kicking myself for jumping on a sale on >2TB HDDs and some new hardware to build a new server for 5.0 a couple months back as there seemed to be indications "final" would be out soon. The stuff has just been sitting there letting the return periods expire and warranties age, though at least I've had plenty of time to run the preclear script several times on the drives. My own fault for "jumping the gun" I guess. Anyways, I know of course there can't be a "timeline" for 5.0 final but I'd rather not wait weeks or months more for the "rubber stamp" if the RC is getting close enough. There seems to be a lot of talk that the distinction between "RC" and "final" is getting very fine these days - maybe fine enough not to care about if you only want to run the stock build and don't care about the GUI or plugins. Example post here. If so, as of today is 16c the most data-reliable release to run? How serious is the Modified Time not being set properly issue? Are there any other issues that could be a concern for data reliability? As a side note, I took a look through Tom's post history. Despite the impression that things keep getting added to the 5.0 release causing it to be delayed (some of which may be happening with the GUI/plugin stuff, I don't know) I actually saw where time and time again he wrote things like "yes that would be nice but will be post-5.0" "I can't delay the release for that" "I know you guys are anxious for 5.0" etc etc. So that's nice to see he's trying to be very careful about "scope creep" to get 5.0 out as soon as possible. There had also been pretty good communication for awhile, but lately it slowed down a lot. As of yesterday Tom #2 (Harmser) hadn't posted anything related to the schedule or Tom's status since June 4th and Tom hadn't since August 8th. I think garycase said it well: Thanks for your help!
  7. Great work and even better communication lately. Greatly appreciated by many I'd like to echo graywolf's positive feedback on your work and especially your communication, Tom. It really has been great to feel more in the loop as to when I might be able to use my 3TB and 4TB drives in a stable release, along with all the many other improvements that are coming in 5.0 (safe mode, etc). I think the insight into the issues you've been facing and decisions you've been making helps keep the non-computer science people like myself more patient, compared to if we only had the "2011-01-24" 4.7 release date to stare at lol. I'm sure no one needs this mentioned again - but to say it anyways - scope creep is an insidious beast that will find any way possible to "move the target" on a project and cause frustration to all. Must diligently watch for it and make deliberate decisions about what can be included in 5.0 and what must wait for 5.1. I think many people are afraid that if this stable release took 2.5+ years to come out, the next one could be years away too - so it may be 2015 before we can use anything that doesn't get squeezed into this release! I have a background in science, where we like to isolate one variable at a time if possible, so my humble opinion is the fewer changes made between releases the better - especially if there are any "big" changes involved as there are in the 5.0 release. If change lists are kept as small as possible, we won't have to wait till 2015+ for 5.1 "stable" and we won't have to be so concerned about what makes it into the "official" 5.0 release. Best of luck putting on the final touches to the code and documentation, Tom, and thanks again for bringing us "along for the ride" with your updates.
  8. Thank you so much for working on this, SlrG! I was burglarized a few months ago and afterwards got a wired IP camera (specifically this one here http://www.dahuasecurity.com/products/ipc-hdw2100-195.html). I set it up just assuming, for some reason, that I could set it up to record to my Unraid box (they both connect to the same switch). I then discovered oops, ftp is apparently not a simple thing to get working - at least not for a Linux noob like me haha. Hopefully one day in the next few months I'll be able to get my camera to record to Unraid somehow. I'm hoping not to be burglarized again of course, but if it does happen again I'd love to be able to have a clue about when it was, what was taken, how many people there were, and maybe even how they got in or who they were. I know some people have said they setup ftp on a computer and then copy the files from there to their Unraid box, but I'd really rather not have another device in the loop using power and being a possible source of failure. Right now I'm running 4.7, but I have a couple 4TB drives pre-clearing on 5.0-rc12a via the preclear_disk.sh script and virtual terminals on the console. I'm wary of migrating the array I care about to a beta but I'm considering it soon. After all, this is only the 36th iteration of version 5 so how many bugs can be left? Ok, maybe a lot - I don't know how these things work haha. Thanks again anyways for your work on this. Looking forward to seeing if I can use it to help set up an ftp destination for my ipcam!
  9. NO WAY!!! After almost a month since your last post I had the following all typed out and when I clicked "preview" it warned me of a new post.... Lol haha. How'd it go? How's it been going? I'm looking to get a new MOBO myself and am fairly well decided on the G850/LGA1155 for CPU, and have been looking at the same MOBO you mentioned you were thinking about (the Asrock B75M). The only difference between that and the Pro seems to be memory slots and audio channels so I may want to go with the simpler board vs your Pro. Anyhow, any issues with the 3xSATAIII ports or anything? Do you have a way to measure your power consumption? I'm also curious how fast parity checks run for you. My Atom board tops out around 20-25 MB/s and I'm hoping that can take a big leap up. (In fairness to the Atom CPU, that MOBO only has 2 onboard SATA so 4 of my 6 drives share a lone PCI card - yuck!) Thanks for posting! Jacob Anyhow, thank you again. Would you please also write how many drives you're using and what ports they're using if you have a chance? Is it just the 3 drives and are they only using the 3 SATAIII ports then?