CRDark

I have 1 Gbps up and down, and they have 1Gbps download (actual around 750Mbps) and 35Mbps upload. I don't expect to get full speed between us, but it should definitely be more than 12Mbps, at least for download. I can set up an actual test but think it would show something more than that.

One of my family members was able to connect but when transferring a test file (about 9GB) they were only getting about 1.5MB/s upload. With another test file for download they were still only getting about 1.5MB/s. Looks like SMB + VPN = issues but is there a way around this to make it more viable for transferring?

Thank you! I replaced the url with the IP and am able to connect to the shares though it took longer to connect than when I was using Remote Tunneled Access. I was too caught up with trying to use the internet I ended up ignoring that part. So there's no way for them to use the VPN in which they use their own internet (not mine) + access to the shares at the same time? It's not that big of a deal if they have to switch back and forth, though letting them keep it on would be nice.

I am trying to set up wireguard in order to access user shares remotely and was able to successfully with the Remote Tunneled Access option. However, my family (who does not live with me) will be using this as well and they don't necessarily need access to my internet, just the shares. I was trying to use the Remote Access to Server option, but when I use that I end up not being able to connect to the internet or the shares. I am using my phone to test but is this the right option and right way to go about it? I was thinking about using Nextcloud but I was hoping to keep is as simple as possible where they can turn it on and then drop files in with file explorer like they're used to since teaching them something different would be a process with them.

@Goobaroo Thank you so so much! My bad, didn't know it wasn't ready, saw it was available and instantly tried it

I see that you added one, thank you! Though when trying to start it the logs return /launch.sh: line 17: syntax error in conditional expression /launch.sh: line 17: syntax error near `Server' /launch.sh: line 17: `if ! [[ -f RLCraft Server Pack 1.12.2 - Release v2.9.1c.zip ]]; then'

Do you have a guide to make different minecraft containers? I'd like to make one for RLCraft and Galactifract

I just created a new Unraid server and need some help setting up external access to both files and game servers. There's a few options, and I'm leaning toward Tailscale but I don't want to have to install tailscale on every device that will access the the server, mainly laptops and desktops since phone might not be possible without installing something even if its not tailscale. I will be using this as a file backup for family outside of the house and some of them aren't the most tech savy. Additionally I will be using it as a game server (minecraft, 7 days to die, etc). My ideal setup is for file servers I can put something share.homeserver.com, and games like game.homerserver.com to connect to the correct game. Is something like this possible, and what would be the best way to go about this for ease of use and security? Cloudflare/tailscale/wireguard/etc?

I just finished my new Unraid build with a 5950x and a be quiet Dark Rock 4 CPU Cooler in a SS CS380 case. Currently going through all the stress tests, I haven't started the array yet, and just started prime 95. The CPU temps are kinda insane, idle it was about 35C and with prime 95 (Small FFTs) and CPU temps havent gone over 53C. For temp monitoring I installed the Dynamix System Temp plugin and using the default driver that it found. Something seems wrong since those are super low temps, so just want to check if anyone had thoughts on it?

Ah sorry I mean RAID 0 to have the capacity of both but I could just get bigger drives instead of splitting them across multiple drives. I'll stick to one then. It would be nice to do all Nvme but just to make sure I really need it since they have the same TBW performance (comparing the 870 evo and 970 evo plus) so it's just making sure I need the speeds. With Sata drives I could get a hotswap bay which would be pretty nice but if having all Nvme is that much better I can look at getting an expansion card. I was going to go with 4 drives after watching some spaceinvaderone videos. 2 for protected write cache, 1 for docker containers, and 1 for VMs. I could combine docker containers and VMs onto 1 pool but might as well just set them up like that now.

Bumping this topic. If anything I at least would like to know if it's better to run game server and the write cache off Sata or Nvme SSDs, or does it really matter? I'm guessing I can only run docker containers off one cache pool so I can't spread them across multiple drives so probably Nvme might be good to run all of them. Since I have limited PCIE lanes, I was only hoping to use 2 Nvme but should I just use 4 Nvme?

The 980 is good but keep it mind it does not have it's own DRAM cache and instead shares with the rest of the system. While this does make it run marginally cooler, it also makes it susceptible to lower performance when RAM utilization is higher. It probably won't be an issue but something to be aware of. An alternative might be the 970 evo plus which has it's own cache, slightly faster, and should be around the same cost.

I'm looking to set up an unraid server for the first time next month and trying to figure out what the best pool and share configuration would be. I'll be using this as a NAS for family, multiple game servers, and media streaming. The following is what I initially was thinking for storage, I'll probably be getting a 13700k as the CPU for transcoding and abundance of threads. 8 x 4TB HDDs 4 x 1 TB Sata SSDs 2-3 x 1 TB Nvme SSDs The HDDs will be the array with 2 of them being parity. Here are the questions I have when setting up the shares: I want to set a 2 of the SSDs to be a write cache in raid, should they be the Nvme or Sata ssds? Should I have a separate write cache for media files? The media files themselves I would pin to 2 of the HDDs while the others would be for files. Should game severs SSDs be Nvme or Sata? The game servers are mostly going to docker containers (minecraft/valheim/the forest/etc). From what I've read/watched the game data of this (docker containers) is under appdata, which I can attach to a pool. I was initially thinking I'd use 2-3 of the ssds as game servers to split the usage of them so it's not all hitting one drive to extend the life (I would have backups to the array). If I add 2 ssds under a pool for appdata (not in raid) will it split it evenly across them. Also, would data for a single game be split across the 2 drives, such as a minecraft world be split across both, and would it affect performance? Or would it be better to do a single larger drive even though it means it would all be on the same drive? I will possibly setup VMs though depending on the game, or maybe other type of projects. Should these be a separate pool as well? Is there any other pools that should I create as well? Any input would be greatly appreciated since this will be the first time setting up something like this. I have decent linux experience though so I can do things through command line if need be.