Xarishark
-
Posts
13 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Downloads
Store
Gallery
Bug Reports
Documentation
Landing
Posts posted by Xarishark
-
-
So in other words VALVE TIME. its ok I get it. I hope for the best as my client will soon hit the drive limit ( server is 3 months old LOL!).
-
Just now, JorgeB said:
AFAIK there are no plans to expand this limit, but there are plans to support multiple unRAID arrays.
Any idea if they would act behind the same FUSE layer or be separate entities to the user? Is there ANY eta on the feature as i remember this being talked about for years?
-
For starters I would like to thank limetech for creating such an amazing product that I use personally and professionally for years now!
I currently manage a server for a client on a 48-bay server (24 Bays each side 8U)
1) Is there a consideration or a plan to expand on the 28+2 MAIN array drive limit?
2) If the 28+2 is a drive limit is a hard limit it would be awesome to go the VDEV way and allow us to create another main array that would be functionally in the same pool as the first array but would be a new group of parity drivers and data drives. So, the idea is that you have two Arrays of let's say: ((28+2) + (28+2)) that is served as ONE filesystem after the FUSE layer. The mover would have the same logic of highwater or balance the arrays, so you just fill the first array and then fill the second and both arrays share a single cache pool.
Why not just create a new dedicated pool instead!?: The biggest positive thing of unraid is the ARRAY part, only wake up the drives that are working and keep thermals down. Is the perfect LOW COST archiving solution that allows to add one drive at the time without long downtime or sync time after each time a drive is added without having to disable the array or spin all the disk every time you add one (unless you are doing something to the parity ofc). Whoever recommends to "just create a new pool" misses the whole point of the OS. People use Unraid for 2 reasons first the main array simplicity and low power use and secondly the ease of use of the docker system with the apps.
This is the status of my clients Array currently. Any ideas or recommendations to what my options are for expansion are welcome! Thanks in advance for you time.
-
You have already done the IPC 4U 4424 this is the 4416 Model just remove the top 8 Drives and add the 2 5.25" square and you are done!. Thanks for your work!
-
Hey I enabled the syslog server and created a syslog share on my ssd cache but I dont see any logs being created! here are my settings the folder is currently sitting at 0B
-
Should I create a new topic when the crash happens again or just reply here?
-
I was watching a movie on plex and the whole server suddenly became unrensponsive. I dont mind a container crashing etc but whats REALLY annoying is that the smb shares work fine but the webUI is completely unrensponsive. I had to do a forced shutdown but most times the server will come back after about 10 minutes being stuck like that. I had this problem for a while too but its pretty rare
-
Hi Today when i connected to my Sab instance I saw about 5 errors saying that the nzb of some movies( all of them in row) where empty nzbs. Im pasting the Log file. If its my Radarr instance at fault I will post on the Support page of this container.
-
Am I doing something wrong and nobody is answering me? Do I need to provide any additional information??
-
I had some permission errors that i "think" fixed with umask 002(On deemix container and qbittorent) Because I was getting the cant more or delete files over SMB and the only way i could fix it was with new safe docker script. Now I see SABNZBD throwing errors that it cant find a part.rar file(mover was running every hour if that matters). Please check my logs to see if there is anything else I should fix because Im freaking out if everything is proper!.
Thanks in advance! -
The latest version of Deemix is saving files with wrong permissions! I am unable to move them or delete the files in the download folder over smb( I have one share every other folder made by other containers has no problem) docker permision script is fixing the file permissions. The container is using the default uid's (99 100) as any other container.
-
Hi can you edit the explanation of the "Only move at this threshold of used cache space" to specify that it work with conjunction of the schedule mover script and it isn't a stand alone check?
[Script] binhex - no_ransom.sh
in User Customizations
Posted
I also would like to get this in plugin form with a UI scheduling option etc like the mover or parity check has. Also, I would like to ask for a feature locking files that are x days old that way files can become immutable after let's say 3 days in the server etc. Thanks in advance!