gubbgnutten
-
Posts
377 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Downloads
Store
Gallery
Bug Reports
Documentation
Landing
Posts posted by gubbgnutten
-
-
OK md3 turns out to be /dev/sdd which happens to be my parity drive.
So I am trying
xfs_repair -v /dev/sdd
It said something about bad super lock at the very beginning then tons of "." going by.
Can a bad parity drive cause the system to lock up? Could of that been my troubles all along?
Seems like you are panicking and trying things randomly. You are probably making things worse...
/dev/sdX is not guaranteed to be consistent between boots. Did you identify the drive based on model/serial number or just sdd?
If md3 is your parity drive, assignments are messed up. And parity does not have a file system, so if that is the case it shouldn't be "repaired" by xfs_repair. Also, do you understand the implications of working against /dev/sdd?
-
But in the case were one sets up a new array, and all data disks as well as the parity-to-be have been pre-cleared, the exact contents are already known - zeros! No file systems on the data disks yet, formatting is later in the process.
-
Sounds like you have a fully functional setup at the moment, do you have any reason to mess with that?
The main reason to run OpenVPN on a full computer instead of a consumer router would be speed. A full computer will likely be able to encrypt/decrypt more bytes per time unit than the router. But do you have a need for faster VPN connections? And does your internet connection even support faster connections, or is it saturated already? No idea what speeds you get from the N7000, what your server would be capable of, or the specs of your internet connection...
Another potential reason would be the ability to update the OpenVPN server software independent of the router's firmware releases, should some horrible security hole be discovered.
And yes, you would have to setup port forwarding.
-
What do you mean by "duplicate"?
And have you emptied the share?
-
If "Minimum free space" for a share is set to 3000000000 it means at least 3TB of free space is required to allow writing to the share. Did you mean 3GB? Write that, include the unit.
-
In the diagnostics, shares V---o, s----m and d-----s were also set to "prefer".
Well, a-----a too. But I assume that is appdata which usually should be prefer.
If you check the settings for the downloads share, which field contains 3000000000?
-
Didn't look in syslog, just making an educated guess based on symptoms.
It's looking more and more like ReiserFS is going to be a problem from now on for some people, maybe it's time for limetech to make an official statement about migrating off of ReiserFS sooner rather than later.
I think you are right.
It used to be that I looked for the combination ReiserFS+nearly full disk as a potential problem, but nowadays I cringe just seeing ReiserFS disks present. Simply too many reported cases of symptoms magically disappearing after migrating to another FS...
-
Are your unraid array drives ReiserFS?
From syslog in the first post, yes.
-
Safest option would be to set up a new share and then set only one specific disk to be included. That would keep files on one disk without exposing disk shares and risk mixing them with user shares.
As noted, any individual file is only stored on one disk. Multiple files in the same folder may however, depending on settings, be written to different disks.
-
Since you can SSH to the box you can try to grab diagnostics from the command line by executing
diagnostics
The diagnostics zip should then be saved to your flash drive.
-
Was more thinking of the downloads share.
Posting the diagnostics zip would be a more convenient way to supply logs and settings, see Need help? Read me first!.
-
Sounds like you have use cache set to "prefer" instead of "yes".
-
GPU passthrough is handled by passing the entire device through to a single RUNNING VM. You cannot share the same card with 2 RUNNING VM's and passthrough one port to each. the same card can be in two different VM's, but only one can be run at a time.
using the integrated graphics port on your mother board if it has it, adding a second card would be the only way.
Well, the phrasings "SLI GTX 970" and "one GPU for Linux OS and then the other GPU for Windows" kind of implies two cards, or maybe it is just me... I would also assume "my KVM switch" means a traditional KVM switch, and not anything VM related.
If the two cards are separated and passed through to two different VMs, I don't see any reason why it wouldn't work. Then again, I haven't really played with that yet.
-
I wouldn't use the disks in an array in the meantime, there are simply way too many potential situations that can cause writes to them...
If you need access to the data while maintaining the hope of rebuilding one of the failed drives, make sure any access to the disks is 100% read-only.
-
The diagnostics zip, see Need help? Read me first!.
-
It takes approx 5 seconds to spin up a disk... so that wouldn"t be it I would guess..
Five seconds is absolutely noticeable, just long enough for someone to start worrying that something might have crashed.
And I would also note that not allowing folders to be split can lead to other problems, since it can force unRAID to try to write to a full disk.
Absolutely. I used to plan split levels for shares to keep stuff together and ended up having to check available space all the time... Allowing files to be split as required is way more convenient!
I'm usually happy with High Water and just rearranging a few files once or twice a year. Way less hassle for me, and typically fewer disks spinning at any one time.
-
Also... Think about why you want this... I also "balance" sometimes, but I must admit there is not a real reason to do it.. If you use the user shares you will not even notice this..
One reason would be binge-watching. Having the full TV show on one single disk ensures that the next episode is not on a spun down disk.
-
Check the contents of /boot/config/ssh, do you have zero bytes keys there?
-
Have i overlooked something in the instructions because my cache drive which is on the raid card doesn't auto mount when server restarts.
I have to stop the array, add the cache drive and start the array. All works normal after manually mounting the drive.
Try using another web browser when adding the cache drive next time.
-
Win10 has a Use the following DNS server addresses 208.67.222.222 ...
i switched to Obtain DNS server address automatically.
Nevertheless pinging elsewhere goes to [173.45.161.113]
Sounds like OpenDNS. Famous for extending their DNS services with crap that breaks stuff.
Edit: You might need to reboot or wait for cached results to expire.
-
There are plenty of users complaining about non-existing addresses resolving to that particular IP, so I would suspect either some crappy security software gone awry, or malware. Unlikely to be due to the ISP since the Windows 7 machine can resolve things properly. Compare the DNS settings of the 10 and 7.
-
OK, I've added 192.168.1.1 tower line to my windows host file. It immediately enabled me open the server GUI by typing tower/ at the address bar of my browser.
The folder and files weren't accessible as before, so i've deleted all credentials associated with the tower and tower ip address, rebooted the PC and everything is back to normal, everything looks fine. Great - thanks for you all. However. I believe i still have an inherent problem:
pinging tower works now fine
pinging i.dont.exist tries to ping that weird ip address, [173.45.161.113], outside my network.
Any ideas?
There is a bad DNS server configured somewhere. Either on your Windows 10 machine, your router or your ISP.
What results do you get with ping on your Windows 7 machine?
-
I get a weird adrress when pinging tower:
Pinging tower.Home [173.45.161.113] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 173.45.161.113: bytes=32 time=158ms TTL=47
Reply from 173.45.161.113: bytes=32 time=158ms TTL=47
Reply from 173.45.161.113: bytes=32 time=166ms TTL=47
Reply from 173.45.161.113: bytes=32 time=158ms TTL=47
Ping statistics for 173.45.161.113:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 158ms, Maximum = 166ms, Average = 160ms
Address should be 192.168.1.11
Hmm. Don't like that at all...
Why tower.Home?
If you run
ping i.dont.exist
does it also resolve to 173.45.161.113? Is something appended to it?
Edit: Don't have Windows 10 anywhere, so I can't be more specific, but I would verify the DNS settings (server, suffix, everything) and additionally make sure there are no toolbars, crap security software or other malware interfering with the settings.
-
I would do a new config.
...either with parity added (and not check "parity is valid"), let parity sync and enjoy some protection.
...or without parity added (no worse off than with the current invalid parity) and enjoy the speed benefits while moving data around.
Right now it seems like you are getting the downsides of both options - slowness and no protection against disk failure.
eth0 no ip adress & no webpage
in General Support
Posted
Can't see any pictures, Microsoft just asks me to log in.
If you use the console, execute "diagnostics". It should save a diagnostics zip on the flash drive. Attach that one to a post.