timc6896

Wondering if the reason it was stable was because at least one drive was running all the time. In my current setup, as long as I leave 39 out of 40 drivers running, everything runs fine. As soon as I spin down the 40th drive, that's where the problem occurs. This sounds like a bug in UD? The same Advanced Format SAS drives works perfectly under the array with all drives spun down.

Do you know if there's a way for use a previous version of UD?

Hmm.. I have tried 3 different enclosures, all with different 850watt power supplies that all work when under an array, but just not under Unassigned devices. I'm wondering if the 3 drives that swapped out is causing this issue. They are Advanced Format SAS drivers.

Here's what I'm looking at

I am experiencing a behavior that was not present before and for the life of me, I can't figure out what. I have 40 unassigned drives all formatted to XFS. They are a mixture of SAS and SATA drives (SAS Spindown plug-in installed). When all drives spin down, almost half of the drives have the "Reboot" grayed out button showing where you normally see the "Mount" / "Unmount" button. The error log shows UnAssigned Device plug-in trying to mount with the error message saying the drives are already mounted. The only way to fix this is to umount all the drives from command line and remount using the GUI. But when the drives spindown, the same problem appears again. This was never an issue before. I have tried different backplanes, power supply, cables, drives, renaming the drives. I can spinddown 39 out of the 40 drives. As soon as the last drive tried to spindown (doesn't matter which order or what drive), the problem appears. Anyone seeing this behavior?

Trying to figure out why 2 identical model Seagate SAS drives (ST10000NM0096) NETAPP X377 10TB where one drive spins down and the other doesn't. Anyone ever encounter something like this? Running: sdparm --command=sense /dev/sdy /dev/sdy: NETAPP X377_STATE10TA07 NA00 (This drive spins down without issues) sdparm --command=sense /dev/sdm additional sense: Failure prediction threshold exceeded (This is the drive that will not spin down) Running: sdparm --flexible -6 -v -S -p po for both drives yield the same below for both drives Power condition [0x1a] mode page [PS=1]: PM_BG 0 [cha: n, def: 0, sav: 0] STANDBY_Y 0 [cha: y, def: 0, sav: 0] IDLE_C 0 [cha: y, def: 0, sav: 0] IDLE_B 0 [cha: y, def: 0, sav: 0] IDLE_A 0 [cha: y, def: 0, sav: 0] STANDBY_Z 0 [cha: y, def: 0, sav: 0] IACT 1 [cha: y, def: 1, sav: 1] SZCT 9000 [cha: y, def:9000, sav:9000] IBCT 1200 [cha: y, def:1200, sav:1200] ICCT 6000 [cha: y, def:6000, sav:6000] SYCT 6000 [cha: y, def:6000, sav:6000] CCF_IDLE 1 [cha: y, def: 1, sav: 1] CCF_STAND 1 [cha: y, def: 1, sav: 1] CCF_STOPP 2 [cha: y, def: 2, sav: 2] Running: smartctl -i returns identical info except for attributes unique to each drive like logical unit and serial number. === START OF INFORMATION SECTION === Vendor: NETAPP Product: X377_STATE10TA07 Revision: NA00 Compliance: SPC-4 User Capacity: 10,000,831,348,736 bytes [10.0 TB] Logical block size: 512 bytes Physical block size: 4096 bytes LU is fully provisioned Rotation Rate: 7200 rpm Form Factor: 3.5 inches Logical Unit id: 0x5000c50094a753f3 Serial number: <<different for each drive of course>> Device type: disk Transport protocol: SAS (SPL-4) Local Time is: Fri Jul 26 08:18:17 2024 PDT SMART support is: Available - device has SMART capability. SMART support is: Enabled Temperature Warning: Enabled

Wow! Added the trailing slash "/" and not it shows correctly! Stupid mistake on my part. I ran the maintenance cronjob and it worked as expected. No issues to report there. Also ran a rebuild by pulling out a drive and replacing with a new drive, worked 100%. This is an awesome plug-in that helps extend unRaid's limitation of a single array.

Please ignore this. This is supposed to be this way. Everything seems to be running

This is great! I just set this up running 1 parity disk and 6 data disks. On the SnapRaid settings page, I can see the parity disk with filesystem of XFS. I can see the other 6 data disks but filesystem is tmpfs? Is this supposed to say XFS as well since all the data disks are formatted as XFS. Total Space for the data disks is also wrong, showing only 1.05MB instead of 12TB. When I do a sync, diff, list, etc, it does show the correct number of files and size. Other than that, everything is checking out correctly.

Have you tried replacing the rclone mounts with local mounts? Like add a drive or two or three. Mount the drives and run mergerfs off of the local drives? This eliminates rclone as a possible issue but allow you to successfully run mergerfs, except you won't have any content/files since it's local with empty hard drives. Hope this makes sense.

From my experience, you can’t mount the drives individually outside the array. If you build a new array and add the disks that you want, it will mount. If you issue those commands to change the sector size on the drive, it will wipe the drive. I’ve done testing on this before. The best way is to manually move the data off the drives, fix the formatting and move the data back. I know it sucks for 500tb been there done that.

I’m about to purchase the same drive. Can you tell me the exact command you ran with openSeaChest? Is this a Seagate only tool? Thanks

I think ripping out is the best. I primarily use the case for the drive bays. How I actually connect the drives can be anything from direct connect to backplane. I have 2 of these cases that I haven’t turned on in like 5 years. So yea, I’m pretty scared now after reading about all these failures.

Why not rip that backplane out and plug in that row directly to each SATA cable? That’s 4 drives. The backplane is not mandatory. At least that’s what is in my Norco case. I’m thinking of doing the same to mine. These are not SAS expander backplanes.