unifiedmamba

AndrewZ replied to my request: ...

Nice, that's what I call support. I'll write an email to the official support team listed on the website and post the result here.

Bump

Sadly not for me. Just tried yesterday. The documentation of unraid doesn't help either. It just mentions the feature casually but I can't find more information about it. Maybe someone "official" could help out here, it could be us using or understanding the feature wrong .

Has anything even changed here? It seems like this topic isn't even recognized by the developers of unraid. It's a feature you pay for and it's definitely not working correctly, so something should be done about this. I am having the same issue and was not able to find any fix for this. Since Unraid just uses KVM and qemu which are standard, could this just be a configuration issue of one of these services?

Dein Verbrauch ist ja mal absoluter Hammer. Ich bin schon froh meinen Verbrauch auf ca. 40-50 Watt im idle gesenkt zu haben. Ich vermute aber dass ein allein mein UPS ca. 10 Watt verbrät, dafür crasht mir im Fall der Fälle halt nicht das NAS. Mein neuer Ryzen 5600G verbraucht aber immerhin im idle weniger als der lahme Athlon 200GE.

@mgutt Yep, it crashes after the PCI command is executed. Is there something I can do about it? But even with everything else enabled I just seem to be able to get power consumption from 67-69 watts to 63-64 watts which isn't so great. Also it seems like the CPU only gets to C2... while the array is stopped.

Powertop seems to completely freeze my system after I run --auto-tune. I need to do a hard reset/restart on the unraid machine because it won't be reachable otherwise (pings are fine, but webserver does not work). What could be the problem here? Athlon 200GE, Gigabyte GA-A320M-S2H, 16GB of RAM, 1*SATA Expansion Card, 1*2,5GbE Intel Card, - enabled CEC2019 - enabled ASPM (Active-State Power Management) in the PCI settings - enabled all C-States like C7/C9/C10 in the CPU settings - disabled Audio - disabled Turbo in the CPU settings

Bump

Are there any News ob this topic?

@Jawalking Do you think it would be a better solution to just create a new qcow2 or even raw image as a secondary drive and add all files that are now located in the shared folder into that one? Since I need the files to be very fast in the VM for nextcloud this sounds like a good solution for me. For use with other containers I could create a NFS share or something from the VM itself. Do you think this would work?

@JonathanM So I've mounted the smb share via this guide https://tecadmin.net/mounting-samba-share-on-ubuntu/ without any further tweaking which results in about 135mb/s in the VM. Seems better, but not the optimal solution. The problem now is that I still don't get full speed when downloading test files to my PC served by apache2. I now get around 50mb/s which is better than before but not the 115mb/s that are possible if I serve the file from a folder that is located on the qcow2 disk of my VM. Additionally I have made bad experiences with the handling of small files by SMB which results in very very low speeds when transferring a few small files. I would therefore like to fix the 9p mount to avoid the new problems that SMB could cause with my use case.

Oh no with my windows PC. I don't feel like using a Microsoft standard to share files between two Linux machines should be the right thing to do. There must be an issue with 9p. But I will see how I am able to mount it via SMB and will give feedback.

Around 115mb/s but this is limited by the network speed (1GBe minus overhead)

Hello guys, I'm running a VM that is located on my SSD cache drive and has a few user shares mounted which are located on the array via 9p. Mounting etc. works well, but I am experiencing very slow read/write speeds atm. The shares perform well within Unraid (tested with around 150mb/s read/write) but as soon as they are used inside my debian VM the read speed of the uncached part significantly decreases to about 10-15mb/s. Here is my fstab config: backups /mnt/backups 9p trans=virtio,version=9p2000.L,_netdev,rw,msize=104857600 0 0 The msize entry already increased my write speed, but read speed is still very slow. Reading/writing to the VMs virtual disk is about 1200mb/s, so everything is fine with the VM itself. Has somebody experienced similar issues and has a clue how to fix this?