JorgeB

Moderators
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    61658

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    650

 Content Type 

Everything posted by JorgeB

  1. JorgeB
    It just means the pool needs to be redundant, for example raid1, it won't work for a single profile or raid0 pool. Diags are after rebooting so assuming nvme1n1 was the other pool member and with the array stopped type: btrfs-select-super -s 1 /dev/nvme1n1p1 Then and without starting the array post the output of btrfs fi show P.S. btrfs is detecting data corruption in multiple devices, unless these are old errors that were never reset you likely have a RAM problem.
  2. JorgeB
    Settings -> SMB Settings -> SMB Extras
  3. JorgeB
    If you didn't yet reboot post the diags and the pool might still be salvageable.
  4. JorgeB
    If it's a raid1 pool just stop array, uassign the device you want to remove, start array.
  5. JorgeB
    And where do you see this, it explicitly says:
  6. JorgeB
    Problem was before this boot, logs start over after every boot, we'd need the diags after it happens again.
  7. JorgeB
    Enable the syslog server and post that after a crash.
  8. JorgeB
    The move to the onboard SATA was mostly because the type of errors are logged more clearly, they do look like a power/connection problem, but since you already replaced cables and the same happens with the different controllers it suggests a disk problem, any way you can replace that disk with a different one?
  9. JorgeB
    Please post the diagnostics.
  10. JorgeB
    No issues so far, lets see how it goes, post new diags if it starts erroring out, don't forget to replace/swap power cable/slot to rule that out also.
  11. JorgeB
    What do you mean split? Pool was convert to raid1 so now it's redundant, that's expected behavior.
  12. JorgeB
    Yes. You will be able to add more vdevs to an existing pool.
  13. JorgeB
    That's how it always worked with the array, parity is just bits, it doesn't care about the file systems. https://wiki.unraid.net/Parity#How_parity_works 2 devices for a mirror, 3 minimum for raidz, this is for pools, not the unRAID parity array.
  14. JorgeB
    Everything looks good so far.
  15. JorgeB
    Same disk failing in different controllers suggests a disk problem, disk you use a different power cable (or backplane slot) also? In the last diags disk is connected to an LSI, you have two, connect to the onboard SATA and post new diags.
  16. JorgeB
    Yes, then reboot and it should be resolved.
  17. JorgeB
    That suggests you have a container mapping to that, creating that path.
  18. JorgeB
    You can use zfs in the array without that limitation, because every device is a single filesystem, without raidz obliviously, for pools nothing that can be done since it's a zfs limitation, btrfs is more flexible, though not as robust, unfortunately you rarely can have everything.
  19. JorgeB
    Please post the diagnostics.
  20. JorgeB
    Yeah, if the firmware is updated could be a bad controller.
  21. JorgeB
    https://wiki.unraid.net/Manual/Storage_Management#Rebuilding_a_drive_onto_itself
  22. JorgeB
    It wasn't before, but for security reasons it's been like that since 6.9 or there about.
  23. JorgeB
    Can you post a link to where you saw that? You can only remove a device from a redundant pool, the pool is then automatically converted to single (if there's only one device remaining).
  24. JorgeB
    Yes, to check the emulated disk.
  25. JorgeB
    Start the array, if the emulated disk6 mounts and contents look correct we usually recommend rebuilding, other option would be a new config and a correcting parity check after, it will take the same time.