JorgeB

Is disk3 not mounting? Might be a filesystem issue, you can post current diags.

https://forums.unraid.net/topic/46802-faq-for-unraid-v6/?do=findComment&comment=819173

You can add setterm -blank 0 to /boot/config/go

You can copy as much data as possible to another array disk(s), still recommend first connecting it to onboard Intel SATA since the SASLP usually crashes/drops the disk when it encounters a read error.

Make sure system notifications are enable.

Disk5 dropped offline so there's no SMART, probably because of the controller, but it does appear to be failing, suggest connecting it to the onboard SATA ports (swap with another disk) and then and since parity isn't valid run ddrescue to try and recover as much data as possible. Pparity looks healthy, though would recommend getting rid of that SASLP controller since they are not recommended for a long time, replace it with an LSI HBA.

Mar 3 05:00:40 Tower kernel: XFS (md1): Unmount and run xfs_repair Check filesystem on disk1.

Mount the old disk with UD then use your favorite tool, you can use krusader, midnight commander (mc on the console), windows explorer, etc.

That's the low end for a single stream, multiple streams from the same disk can get slower due to random access, you'd need to test to see how many streams it can handle. Yes, usually around 115MB/s usable.

It's Unraid.

If you want to change the filesystem you need to move the data elsewhere, then change filesystem by formatting, then restore the data, more info below:

6Gb/s is the interface, normal reads will never get close that that, it should be around 250MB/s max in the outer tracks, slowing down as it starts using the inner tracks, max speed at the most inner tracks should be around 100MB/s.

If don't have enough space on the array on can do this: -do a new config with the larger cloned disk and all the remaining disks -start array to begin parity sync, the cloned disk will be unmountable due to unsupported partition layout -wait for the parity sync to finish -stop array -unassign that disk -start array, emulated disk will now have the correct 10TB partition created and should mount immediatly -stop array -re-assign the disk to rebuild on top, now using the new larger partition.

You can't do this, formatting will delete everything and update parity accordingly, restore the data from the old disk.

Yes, you can add another member later, but first you need to remove the second member from the pool by doing the steps outlined above.

Acknowledge current SMART attributes and keep monitoring, it's showing some issues but nothing fatal for now.

No. What do you mean parity? There's no parity with pools, pool is in raid1 (mirror) so the remaining device will have all the data.

Looks like a connection problem, check/replace cables/slot on party and try again.

You can't do this, and it shouldn't be allowed, it is because of a bug , by doing this the removed device won't be deleted from the pool, so when you assign it to a different pool both will show the same content, to correctly remove the device do this: -stop array -if docker/VM services are using the pool temporarily disable them -unassign all pool devices -start array -stop array -assign all pool devices to the same pool (there can't be a data on this device will be deleted in front of any pool member) -start array (you can re-enable docker/VM services now) -stop array -unassign the pool member you want to removed -start array -once the balance and device delete finishes you can stop the array to re-assign the removed device to a new pool

HBA is failing to initialize: Mar 2 18:25:15 kellyridge kernel: mpt2sas_cm0: port enable: FAILED with timeout (timeout=300s) You should upgrade the firmware since it's very old, can also try a different PCIe slot if available.

Disk4 is OK, it's smaller than the other ones so it slows down sooner, disk3 needs to be replaced.

Unraid won't accept that since it requires the partition to use the full device capacity, but you can always copy data from the clone to other drives after mounting it with for example UD pluign.

Yes, get the non F model, as for the board it should work fine, just not sure about the NIC, should be fine with v6.10-rc, might not be with v6.9.x, and it's still a Realtek NIC, Intel would be better, also consider getting the non WIFI model since you won't be using that, unless you want to use it with a VM.

The problem is not free space, it's free unallocated space. Possibly, I don't use it but remember reading it uses a lot of small files.

This and it's possible to list the corrupt files, unlike with the other option, unless there are pre-existing checksums.