Neo_x

100% the solutions. thank you sir! (one less point for AI)

HI Unraid team Knocking on the technical team door here with a weird issue i am having. My system has been running stable on Unraid 6.12.10 for quite a long time now. However, when i try to upgrade to later 6.12 releases, and now more recently, 7.1.4, one of my SAS2008 HBA's does not initialize (which in turn results in missing drives and thus an upgrade failure as the array cannot start). I have thrown this challenge at our AI nemesis aka chatgpt, and it seems like resource allocation could be the cause, where 1 out of my 3 HBA cards did not intialize. I have continued today to firstly upgrade my BIOS, then enabled Above 4G decoding, and disabled all other unneeded hardware (Audio , USB 3.1 ,serial port etc), and retried the update. Same issue repeated. before going down the wrong rabbithole however, i am hoping that more technical guidance can be given. some more detail: Hardware Motherboard AMD Asus PRIME X470-PRO BIOS 6251 CPU AMD Ryzen 9 5950X HBA's SAS2008 (QTY 3) I also have a small GPU installed (as the CPU does not have onboard GPU) NVME x 1 (970pro) I am also using some of the onboard motherboard ports (Believe if memory serves i did this to increase throughput achieved during parity checks, as one of the HBA's was extremely limited in PCIe slot bandwidth) the system is configured to allow me to install up to 24 drives (chassis limit), but i recently reduced it due to failures of some older drives. any recommendations on what i can still try here (hoping someone else had posssibly similar experience) PS currently system is rolled back to verison 6.12.10 (to keep family and friends happy) diagnostics for 7.1.4 and 6.12.10 are included storage-diagnostics-20251004-1140_version6.2.10.zipstorage-diagnostics-20251004_1317_version7.1.4.zip

reverted to 2025.04.05 and working fine for now

adjusted, same result (usage on /mnt/cache is roughy 8 %)

It really seems like it is not running. Installed the plugin again now, and only enabled debug logging (thus threshold is 0%), and clicked on move now. adding some detail SYSLOG TMP folder (Empty)

yes i fully follow that (the log's of the previous version shows exactly that and follows my config). reason i know it is broken, is because my cache is currently above the configured threshold, and files should have been moved. new interations of the mover being run does not give any details on thresholds and/or decisions.

Seems like after updating to Mover Tuning Plugin version 2025.04.24a from Mover Tuning Plugin version 2025.04.05 something broke, as files are no longer being moved see log output from before and after update https://pastebin.com/KRvvLtuW already tried: enabling debug log running /usr/local/emhttp/plugins/ca.mover.tuning/age_mover reset uninstalling/reinstalling running in test mode disabling the plugin (first option in the config list) nothing seems to generate any additional detail in the syslog that can guide to possible reasons. running unraid 6.12.10 and 6.12.15 (occuring on both systems) any ideas please? *edit* after seeing in above logs, i did a force mover without the pluging installed, and mover seems to be running normally still.

ok, that is staring me in the face now. whoops! thank you for spotting that. so that doesn't leave lots of options (moving some drives to SATS might give some bandwidth, but it looks like I will need to consider a 16-port SAS controller (if enough capacity is provided by PCI_E1 slot), or change platform(Threadripper?) I like the intel onboard GPU though. sigh Intel why hast thou forsaken me.

Evening unraid peoples I am suffering from slow parity check speeds(<60MB/s) on a 24-bay system. I believe this is not an uncommon setup, thus any ideas as to where the bottleneck could be is welcome. I built this system end of 2023, thus most parts is relatively new and same firmware. MSI PRO Z690-A Intel® Core™ i7-13700K @ 3366 MHz Memory: 64 GiB DDR5 3x SAS2008 PCI-Express 8 port controllers (IT mode) 24 x ST20000NM007D (20TB Seagate EXOS) ( 8 per controller) Running diskspeed docker, it reports that one controller is running slow: Controller 1 Current & Maximum Link Speed: 5GT/s (PCIe 2) width x8 (4 GB/s max throughput) Controller 2 Current & Maximum Link Speed: 5GT/s (PCIe 2) width x1 (4 GB/s max throughput) Controller 3 Current & Maximum Link Speed: 5GT/s (PCIe 2) width x4 (4 GB/s max throughput) I also have two NVME drives connected (first two M2 ports, but had also tried ports 2 and three without speed difference) I am considering that it could be a shortage PCIe lanes, but then other users with similar 13/14th gen systems would have suffered the same. Any ideas as to what could be causing the x1 width on controller 2? faulty controller? or is something amiss on the motherboard Thx! Controller 1 speed results Controller 2 speed results Controller 3 speed results

Hi Tom /Team 10 years plus user here (struggling to find that email where i bought my pro license). Difficult choice you guys are facing, but a business has to remain afloat. a possible option, for lifetime pro users, is to donate to the limetech project. ie have a website track the upcoming expenses for the year, and showing how much of that total has been met? understand it is a bit of a shift, but i will 100% support your product, witha bit more visibilty on where the money goes (wnat what you are short) even if it is a small amount of maybe 10/20/30USD per year (user choise), i believe it will fill a few holes. keep up the good work! Regards

thank you. Typically 4k h265 HDR to 4k h264 -> don't see a reason to go lower Following the thread at a clance it seems tone mapping only recently started working. any detail is welcome! thank you sir

can anyone confirm how many 4k transcodes the 12900 can handle? seeing mixed results online, and are looking to see if what combination of hardware would give a cost effective amount of streams. Power usage not that important (<400watt under load should be fine) my alternativate would be to rather go nvidia gpu, but then HDR tone mapping needs to be supported

hi guys just checking if this is normal behaviour : somehow, when mover is activated, it writes to multiple drives at the same time. i don't think multiple drive writes is good, especially for the resulting write to parity. any ideas what could cause this? *i understand this might not be related to the scheduler plugin at all -> let me know if it should be moved.

Running in a bit of a challenge here, where mover only seems to move a certain percentage of files. Expected operation -> cache share hits 95% usage, mover then moves all files to array. In stead it only moves roughly 20%. on the 23rd i did a manual move(Main Menu, the Move button) which took it down to +-10%. 24th and 25th was the automaic moves once it hits 95%, but it only moved about 25% configuration as follows : Any ideas? should i enable mover logging and/or test mode for further troubleshooting? Thx!

Now this will be interesting. thank you DZMM -> i must admit. trusting your script to perform its magic is really something owe you a beer or three by now!