IMTheNachoMan

Thank you so much. I just needed one person who knows more than I to validate my thoughts. I will keep an eye on the mover schedule and adjust if needed. I will never write more than 5 GB in one hour so I'm covered there. Thank you again!

Is there anyway to do it right from Unraid without having to format the flash drive? Like some kinda command that'll basically reset it back to a clean/fresh install?

Are you selling? What you got?

Sorry for the verbosity but I want to make sure I clearly explain my situation. I have a very simple setup and am moving to unRAID. I already have it installed. I just need some help validating my plan to make sure it makes sense and won't screw me later. I have an Intel NUC with: 128 GB M.2 SSD 2 TB SATA HDD For the last few years I've been running Debian on the 128 GB SSD and my data on the 2 TB HDD. I run very few Docker containers (Plex, SABNzbd, Radarr, Sonarr, SyncThings, and Home Assistant). The containers app data was on the 128 GB SSD (under my home folder) with all of the data on the 2 TB. I never had more than 10 GB used of the 128 GB SSD. My movie/TV content is very small (10 GB at the most) because I download (movies I own on DVD or BluRay), watch, and then delete. Most of the data on the 2 TB are photos (from my wife's DSLR). My 2 TB was exported as a Samba share for my various Windows machines to map for reading/writing. I am not worried much about redundancy. I have a nightly job that backs up all of my photos (from the 2 TB) to BackBlaze B2 using https://rclone.org/. I don't care about the movies/TV. It's been working fine but I wanted something with less maintenance. With Debian I had to do regular updates and monitor for breaking changes -- not that difficult but annoying/tedious. I picked Unraid over FreeNAS cause I wanted to run containers. I have no need to run VMs in it. So now I am trying to figure out how best to structure everything. This is my current thinking: Storage 128 GB M.2 SSD pool/cache formatted as XFS (unless I should use brfs) 2 TB SATA HDD single disk array formatted as XFS (right?) Shares movies and tv cache pool = no -- SABNzbd will move files to here for Plex to read disk = 2 TB HDD downloads cache pool = only -- SABNzbd will download to here and then move data and photos cache pool = yes -- so when I add new photos they are saved to the cache pool and then the mover will move them to the disk array disk = 2 TB HDD security camera I have one security camera that records directly to my server (either FTP or NFS) cache pool = yes -- so the video writes are fast disk = 2 TB HDD I am not changing any of my allocation methods since I only have 1/1 disk so it won't matter. Does this all make sense? Anything I need to change? Anything I am missing? P.S. How is unRAID supposed to be stylized? I see it done so many ways: Unraid, UNRAID, unRAID, UnRAID, etc...)

Then I have to give unRAID props. A lot of products ignore router provided time and make their own NTP call. Props to unRAID for getting it from the router.

Well, I ultimately need more than 2 TB. I was going to use unRAID for a few months and if all goes well get a bigger system with legit 3.5" HDs. So for WAN access it needs HTTPS for trial mode. I assume it must need NTP too. I can't fathom that unRAID wouldn't need to have correct time...

SATA. 256 GB m.2 SSD for cache 2 TB SATA HDD for main storage I don't need redundancy or raid or anything. Right now, on the same box, I am running Debian as the host OS with everything else I need in containers. Managing a full OS stack is time consuming (upgrades, packages, failures, etc...). So I was thinking I could use unRAID cause it can run my containers. I have a job that backs everything up to Google Drive using rclone so I don't need any local redundancy.

Most false positives are legitimate blocks but the website doesn't want to or can't fix (i.e. dependency on a 3rd party library). So the ad-blocker is blocking something it should but since product team won't fix/address they flag it as a false positive. And might interfere is a big chance to take to completely disable an ad-blocker. And I am not expecting any issues. In fact, everyone I've spoken to said they didn't have to disable theirs. So I don't think we actually need to disable it. Which makes me wonder why the documentation says that. If your car instruction manual said to leave the doors unlocked, you'd want to know why. It's not a normal/standard request. I agree there are legitimate cases for whitelisting or disabling but those should be explained. Product companies should not ask customers to make bad security decisions without explaining why. Security is a big problem in the consumer space and blanket instructions like that are very dangerous. I'm just trying to better understand why the documentation says it. I am not accusing anyone of doing anything naughty. I am sure it was added for a legitimate reason. I am just trying to find the specifics of that reason. That information should be documented somewhere.

Well, I was going to give it a try to see how it works. My Intel has a 256 GB m.2 and 2 TB HDD. I was hoping I could just use the 2 TB for storage and the m.2 for cache. But I have no idea if it will work. If you tell me now it won't then I won't bother. I was planning on upgrading my NUC anyway.

I am sure it needs NTP out of WAN, right? It probably needs HTTP/HTTPS out the WAN -- especially to get the trial account and look for updates? Those are the obvious ones. Almost every product tells you what ports it needs/uses. I am just trying to find the same information for unRAID.

According to the documentation at https://wiki.unraid.net/Articles/Getting_Started#Preparing_your_browser_.28ad-blocker_settings.29: Does anyone know why? From what I see online, everyone is saying they haven't disabled their ad-blockers and Unraid works fine. So it appears we don't actually have to disable it. So why does the documentation say we need to? I work in Cybersecurity doing security reviews of products, including products like Unraid, and that part of the documentation doesn't sit well with me. It is a huge red flag in our review process. I am not saying Unraid is doing anything nefarious -- I am just trying to understand why the documentation says this. If it is a band aid for addressing previously reported issues, where can I find details? I tried searching around and came up dry. And before anyone says it is a low risk or common ask, it is not. I do this all day long with hundreds of products and not one of them gives a blank instruction to disable an ad-blocker. Many say to do that if you have issues with specific things/functions, but not as some blanked installation instruction.

I have a rather locked down home network. I am planning on installing unRAID on my Intel NUC. I'm trying to find information on what ports unRAID needs but can't find any concrete documentation. I assume it needs 80 and 443 for LAN to LAN access so other clients on my network can access the unRAID GUI. Then I assume Samba or NFS ports for LAN to LAN -- for obvious reasons. But I am sure unRAID needs other ports? For example: 80/443 to WAN out so it can have internet access? NTP, DNS? I cannot find a listing of the ports unRAID needs so I can configure them in my firewall.