• Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by wsume99

  1. Right now you can get a 3TB drive for $100 - check the good deals page. I'm not very optimistic about BF/CM HDD deals. I can't really see 3TB drives going for less than $80. In order for a 4TB drive to match the current prices of 3TB drives they'd have to drop to $133. I suppose it's possible but at that price the quantity is likely to be limited so you're unlikely to get many at that price. I think that only thing that will really drive down the price of 4TB drives is the widespread availability of 5TB drives. So I guess what I'm saying is this - if you're going to need more capacity in the next 1-2 months there is no guarantee that you're going to be able to purchase a drive much cheaper than $33/TB - which is just about where it was right before the floods.
  2. I've also avoided 7200 rpm drives because they were hot and consumed more power however the newer 7200 rpm drives with 1TB platters have significantly reduced the gap between 7200 and green drives. I'm converting from 2TB green drives (WD and Hitachi) to all 7200 3TB drives with 1TB platters. I haven't measured my power consumption since adding two 7200 rpm drives but I doubt it is a significant increase. However I do know that those Toshiba 3TB drives absolutely blow away the green drives in terms of performance. I precleared a 3TB Toshiba drive in just about the same time it takes to preclear a 2TB WD green drive and the last 1TB of my parity check speeds are more than 50% faster than the first 2TBs where the green drives are being read. I haven't checked write speeds to the array yet but I bet those went up as well.
  3. You can get the retail version of this drive for $99.99 thru today (11/7). So for $10 less you're getting an extra year warranty and better packaging. That's a win-win in my book. Link to previous post: Toshiba 3TB HDD $99.99 I hesitated pulling the trigger but in my mind the retail drive is a pretty good deal. I've been trying to hold out on my 2TB drives until BF/CM and just jump up to 4TB. I'm thinking that OEM 3TB drives may go as low as $80 which would be cheaper but it's OEM vs. retail and I don't seem to have good luck getting the really good deals on BF/CM. To get the same $/TB on 4TB drives I'd have to see them going for $133 and while that may be possible they are likely to be gone in just a few minutes at that price. So I'm taking the "bird in the hand is worth two in the bush" route and ordering two of the 3TB retail drives.
  4. LOL - I don't think I'd visit a Radio Shack if they were giving them away!
  5. Link to TigerDirect page $140 - $30 MIR = $110 (Limit 2) Currently $15 less than Amazon but you'll have to wait for the rebate. Lowest price I have seen yet on any 3TB RED/NAS drive. Makes me wonder what price we may see on BF/CM?
  6. @ Matrixvibe - Where did you get those bushings (one white & one black) for the cable management holes you drilled?
  7. Yes, I realize that all drives are equally important. My point, which perhaps was not completely clear, is that you'll be rebuilding parity following a failed drive replacement more frequently and that increases the chances for encountering a drive failure while the array is not protected by parity which could lead to data loss.
  8. When writing to the array you are limited by the speed of the parity drive AND the data drive being written to. So having a RAID 0 parity drive is not going to make any difference in terms of speed. You are just increasing the risk of having a parity drive failure. Since you'll be likely to have more parity drive failures while using RAID 0 what do you think happens if a data drive fails while you're rebuilding parity? So, even if you could why would you want to? There is really no upside to doing this.
  9. I have found that the best configuration is to have the front panel be the only air intake. So this means that you'll need to do one of the following to all other openings on your case: [*]Install a fan that exhausts air from the case [*]Block the opening to prevent any airflow (I use tape on my case, not the best looking option but it's cheap and works really well)
  10. Not sure why he'll need so many fans for only 3 drives. I have an Antec 300 case with 4 array drives and one non-array drive and I cool it with a single 120mm rear-mounted fan and that fan (PWM) is off most of the time. Granted my server is in my basement but I just don't see a need to install two additional case fans if you are going to only have 3 HDDs. Now when the case is stuffed with HDDs then it may be needed but not now. All you're going to do is burn a couple more watts and make more noise.
  11. I'm having a hard time figuring out why I seem to be unable to access the server from one of my computers. I can telnet to the server from this computer but everything else is totally dead. No shares (disk or user), no unraid gui, no unmenu, etc. I can access everything else on my network from this computer just fine. restarting the computer and server does not change anything. I've searched around the forum and everything I find similar to my issue is related to v5 permissions or some plug-in, but I'm running 4.7 so none of that really applies. I have not changed anything on my server or desktop so I'm really stumped. Can someone point me in the right direction?
  12. I thought I had done this before but I tried accessing the server from a different computer and I can access the web GUI and the shares. So it would appear that my problems are related to that specific PC and not the server.
  13. I powered up the server and captured a syslog this morning. I am able to connect via telnet so it appears that the network connection is ok.
  14. Running 4.7. This evening tried to access a disk share and could not. Tried to open the stock web GUI and unmenu and neither responded. Searched the forum and found instructions for restarting the GUI with commands below but that did not work. killall emhttp nohup /usr/local/sbin/emhttp & Most of the posts with web GUI and lost shares seem to be related to plug-in or add-ons or running out of memory. I restarted and the problem persists. My only recent change was upgrading to pro a few months ago and prior to that my server has been stable for a long time. Not sure exactly what to do at this point. I've attached a copy of my syslog. Any help would be appreciated.
  15. I have all WD20EARS drives in my server and I see the exact same behavior. Not sure how the other OEMs calculate Power_On_Hours but I'd be surprised if it was different.
  16. Power_On_Hours represents the time that the drive was powered and not the hours it was actually spinning, correct? So that SMART attribute is not very useful if your drives are spun down for a large portion of the day.
  17. A license is not a physical product, it's more like a contract, and it's regulated differently than a physical object. Actually that depends on where you live. How about you take a read of this recent court ruling - EU court legalises second-hand software Yep. And Tom lives and sells out of the USA, which is not the EU. The point was not that Tom should follow EU laws but the fact that a license is treated differently than a physical product is not universal and that distinction was just eliminated in the EU. The EU is the largest economy in the world so I'd say that is a fairly significant ruling.
  18. A license is not a physical product, it's more like a contract, and it's regulated differently than a physical object. Actually that depends on where you live. How about you take a read of this recent court ruling - EU court legalises second-hand software I also find it somewhat ironic that users of a product that is built on top of open source software are in favor of restricting the transfer of legally purchased software.
  19. What we are talking about here is the ability of an owner to sell something they purchased legally. In this case the owner purchased a license not a usb drive. So why can't they sell their unraid liscence to a third party?
  20. +1 I don't see this being much different than a failed flash drive. In both cases Limetech has to send a new key file with the updated GUID and there is no profit involved.
  21. I like this idea, but it means more work for you. That is why I don't like the idea. With all the gripes over the past several months about the delay in releasing v5 does it really make sense to now start maintaining two builds? Just to be clear - I'm not griping but rather pointing out the fact that many users are not happy with the rate of progress. So far the poll results are pretty clear that there is not a big need for 32-bit capability. Maybe v5.0 should be the last build with 32-bit capability and going forward it should be 64-bit only?
  22. Release 5.0 final and start working on a 64-bit upgrade but limit it to just that. Don't add any other capability because that will lengthen the development time, just convert to 64-bit kernel. FWIW - This is why there should have been a 4.8 release to add support for >2TB drives. That could have been released a long time ago. There was a poll way back where the users voted to include a whole host of new features rather than simply add >2TB support yet reading through this thread most people supported a 5.0 final release because we need to have >2TB support.
  23. I had already checked the spinup groups possibility and I do not have spinup groups enabled so it must be due to something writing to a data disk. I've got inotify running now I'll just have to wait and see. Thanks Joe.
  24. I'm seeing numerous instances of my parity drive spinning down in my syslog. I do not have a chache drive and there were no writes to my server in the same timeframe so the parity drive never should have spun up in the first place. I think it may be associated with a XMBC client accessing the library but I'm not 100% sure. How can I find out what is causing the parity drive to spin up? Syslog is attached. syslog-2012-09-29.txt
  25. So I found that the recycle bin was corrupted on the drive I was trying to backup. Fixed that but the slow transfers remain. I also added the --bwlimit=100000 argument to my rsync command to see if somehow it was being limited and that (not surprisingly) made no difference whatsoever. So I'm pretty much stumped at this point. Google has not been very helpful although maybe I'm not searching for the correct terms. Anyone have any ideas on how I can figure out what my problem is?