JorgeB

If it's the Marvell issue disabling VT-d is the only fix to always work, iommu=pt doesn't always work, post your diagnostics with VT-d disable.

No, there's no clearing during when replacing an existing data disk, only when adding a new disk to the array.

Probably related to this:

If your going to use it to replace a smaller drive no, if adding to the array you just clear it using the GUI. You can change 2 at the same time if you have dual parity, with single parity just one at a time.

You can use consolid8, like so: I've use it to consolidate both my Movies and TV servers some time ago, can't imagine the time it take to do it manually.

Two things come to mind, first make sure you're regularly trimming your pool, second, it happened to me once a btrfs filesystem becoming very slow when writing without an apparent reason, it was on a single NVMe device, re-formatting it fixed the problem, you can see if that helps using the replace cache procedure, but format instead of replace:

Did another test, pool is 3 x 128GB SSDs in raid0: -cp 25GB in ISOs from one folder on the pool to another -a second simultaneous cp of 25GB in ISOs from one folder on the pool to another -transfer 25GB in ISOs from desktop to pool over lan Again WebGUI was always responsive and load average topped at about 3

Will try that tomorrow.

The diagnostics may give a clue on what caused the error, but the docker image is corrupt, you need to delete and re-create:

I'm not saying btrfs doesn't have something to do with this issue, but very much doubt it's only that, I never had this problem and I use btrfs in all my servers, for array disks and cache, both single and at some point an 8 device raid10 pool, never noticed this problem, just now did a test that with: -mover running (25GB from cache to the array) -manual copy on the console using cp of another 25GB from cache to array -copying another 25GB over lan from my desktop to cache disk load average peaked at about 4, this on a dual core pentium G620 and the webGUI was normally usable during all the operations.

AFAIK it doesn't have a temp. sensor, only way with be with an IR temperature gun.

Split levels can be confusing, let me give you 2 examples that should help, this is how 2 of my shares are set: (Share / Folder / Files) ps: share is also a folder, the top level one Movies / Movie Title / Movie and related files: split only the top level directory, all files from any movie will be on the same disk TV / Show Name / Season # / Episodes: split only the top two directory levels, all episodes from the same season will be on the same disk, different seasons of the same show can be on different disks, if you wanted all seasons to be on the same disk you'd need to set split level as the Movies share.

Delete and recreate docker image:

No, any deleted blocks should be freed immediately.

Possible yes, but not likely, usual issues are parity sync errors and/or dropping disks.

329TB (assembled) !! Man !! Damn! That's my kind of hoarder

Both the SASLP and the SAS2LP have been the source of many issues for some users with unRAID v6, mainly dropped disks, other users have no issues, but AFAIK nobody ever had any problems with the recommended LSI models, hence why they are now the recommended ones.

Settings -> Network Settings -> Interface Rules Select which NIC you want as eth0 and configure it, you'll need to reboot to apply any interface rules change. You can use the boot GUI mode to configure these if you don't currently have network access.

Fist check on the log was non-correct, so no errors were corrected, 2nd check was correct, so a 3rd check should return 0 errors. These may be related to the SAS2LP, but probably aren't, any unclean shutdowns recently? Having said that Marvell controllers are not currently recommended, LSI is a much better option.

Just time for a quick look, don't see anything about docker issues in the logs, there are some ATA errors resulting in 2 disable disks, but since the OP didn't mention them I assume the disks were removed on purpose.

unRAID uses 64 as starting sector for all 4k aligned partitions, and because of how parity currently works I believe it won't be easy to change.

Never used OMV, but Ubuntu can mount a XFS unRAID data disk.

There are known issues with unRAID and Ryzen, see here for a workaround:

IMO main current advantage of ZFS over btrfs is RAIDZ for pools, RAID5/6 on btrfs is still experimental and not ready for production, but using a ZFS pool would negate unRAID main advantages over FreeNAS, like using full capacity from different sized disks, possibility of adding or removing disks from the array, etc, since unRAID uses each disk as a separate filesystem btrfs is as good option, and don't forget that unlike btrfs, ZFS has no filesystem repair tools, if a disk turns unmountable there's nothing you can do, and although rare it happens, you can see that on the FreeNAS forum.

All files are checksummed automatically, if you want to check if everything is OK you can run a scrub, but btrfs checks all files on read and will error on any checksum error, i.e., you're are watching a movie from your server, if the checksum fails there will be and error during playback or copy.