-
Posts
10233 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
65
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Downloads
Store
Gallery
Bug Reports
Documentation
Landing
Report Comments posted by bonienl
-
-
2 hours ago, itimpi said:
I would assume this means the 6.9.0 beta25 release.
yes
- 1
-
The error message comes from Docker, it can’t reserve any addresses for its own internal dhcp service.
Instead of assigning a fixed .2 address, leave it open and let docker assign the address automatically (dhcp). See if that works.
Side note: assigning /30 networks isn’t really practical here.
-
Your DHCP pool assignments are wrong. Leave them unset.
-
This is already corrected in the latest version of Unraid.
-
In the next version there is a selection field in the GUI to chose between virtio and virtio-net.
- 2
-
You can mix as much as you want with different network types.
-
18 hours ago, cybrnook said:
Without this option enabled, this won't work.
Docker containers which are in the "same" network can always communicate with each other.
So either your containers are ALL bridge/host network or are ALL custom network.
-
This information comes directly from your disk, any wrong value is an issue of the disk itself.
Perhaps a firmware update of the disk may correct it?
-
When you enable "Host access to custom networks" it will create a shim network interface, e.g. shim-br0.
This shim interface has the same IP address as the main interface (br0), but it is using a different MAC address (because it is a different interface/network).
This shim interface is used to make Docker think it is accessing a different system, in other words it makes access possible between docker and the host system.
Your pfsense firewall gets confused by this, it sees the same IP address with two different MAC addresses (and two different networks).
I am not using pfsense and don't know how to tell it to understand "this situation". In worst case when pfsense can not cope with this, you need to disable the host access function, which is rarely needed anyway.
This is not a bug but an implementation by design.
- 1
-
5 minutes ago, TexasUnraid said:
It seems to be working now though, so no idea why that was the case.
I did a quick test by doing a New Config and start fresh.
All is working as expected and I can't reproduce your issue.
If/when you encounter this issue again, please include the exact steps how to reproduce it. Thx
- 1
-
2 minutes ago, TexasUnraid said:
I just stopped the array and checked again and sure enough, works just like it did in 6.8,
The behavior in 6.8 and 6.9 is exactly the same, only difference in 6.9 it applies to multiple pools instead of one.
-
6 minutes ago, TexasUnraid said:
will just leave them all set to like 10, annoying to work around but easier then unassigned and reassigning all the drives later.
It is not as bad as you think and no need to use a fixed preset of slots.
When you stop the array and make a change then start with changing the number of slots as desired (or leave as is), then assign the (new) devices.
Next start the array and it will use the updated assignments.
Again when you stop the array you can do the action above.
-
I doubt if this is a corrupted flash.
The device information, including temperatures are stored and updated in RAM (/var/log/emhttp folder).
It looks like a program glitch.
-
6 minutes ago, TexasUnraid said:
In my case it did not list cache at all, only array and parity?
-
2 minutes ago, TexasUnraid said:
So you can't dynamically add drives to a cache pool anymore
No, there is no restriction. You can add up to 30 devices in a pool
3 minutes ago, TexasUnraid said:What is the reason behind not being able to expand the cache pools at a later date anymore?
You can still expand a pool any time you want.
There is a safety measure in place to prevent a wrong profile selection (there is a report about it, but can't find it that quickly). This enforces the user to work in a predefined sequence: first set the slot number (if this needs to be changed) and then assign devices.
-
1 hour ago, TexasUnraid said:
I updated to the beta and noticed 1 minor issue.
The "new config" option does not have the option to preserve cache pools. If you select all it still preserves it but the individual option is missing.
Not a bug, but by design. The preserve options allow only all data devices or all pool devices.
-
4 minutes ago, TexasUnraid said:
Another minor bug I noticed.
It won't let me change the number of slots on the 1st cache pool once I have any drives assigned to it. If I unassign all the drives I can change the slots.
Not a bug, but by design to prevent misconfiguration.
You need to set the number of slots first before assigning devices.
You can not change the slot number if you assign devices first.
-
Better to change the status of this report or open a new report, otherwise it might get overlooked.
- 1
-
Credits go to @eschultz, he made the correction
-
This is corrected in the next version.
-
2 hours ago, itimpi said:
No, Unraid will not move the data to the new pool.
Correct, disk content is never moved when settings are changed.
-
I can't reproduce this issue, but I made an adjustment for the next release, which hopefully addresses this.
- 1
-
To solve the issue of the OP, it is necessary to choose "virtio" as Primary vDisk Bus (instead of SATA)
-
Thanks for reporting. Fixed in next release.
bug in UI and parity check
-
-
-
-
-
in Prereleases
Posted
Urgent?