Kosta

Funny thing, I was unable to get connectivity with the unRAID host ports from the sickbeard docker container, but now I went back and tried it again just to double check... and what do you know... I can reach NZBGet through the host port without any linking EDIT: I used localhost instead of tower as the hostname from SickBeard. Yep, I'm an idiot. Ah well, in case you'll want to link up containers directly for some OTHER reason than stupidity, now you know how.

Hi, I browsed tirelessly through the forums to try and find a way to link up containers that communicate with each other, but was disappointed to see that the preferred solution was dropping files into directories shared between containers. I wasn't satisfied with this approach and decided to find a way to link the containers so that data can be exchanged between them via network communication, like it should be. So without much further ado, here is a quick overview of how I linked up SickBeard container with NZBGet so that it can pass NZB files to it directly: Forget the silly text, I used localhost instead of docker host's hostname, but here's a guide to linking containers either way Step 1 - Add instruction to link SickBeard to NZBget in the unRAID webGUI The command is --link <container name to link with>:<alias> Remember the alias because you will need it for... Step 2 - Refer to the NZBGet container in SickBeard When you perform the linking, docker will create some environment variables that specify which IP address was linked under, and what ports are available. In addition to this, it will also create a hostname in the container you created the link from, that maps alias from the --link command to the internal IP given to the container you linked to. This is probably best seen rather than explained: root@Tower:/mnt# docker exec -i -t e0c4109fc635 bash root@e0c4109fc635:/# cat /etc/hosts 172.17.0.25 e0c4109fc635 ff02::2 ip6-allrouters 127.0.0.1 localhost ::1 localhost ip6-localhost ip6-loopback fe00::0 ip6-localnet ff00::0 ip6-mcastprefix ff02::1 ip6-allnodes 172.17.0.11 nzbget Note the last line! We can now use this to refer to the target container directly, like so: And voila! You're done. It would be nice if there was some sort of a "helper" page in the webGUI to achieve this, but this approach isn't too bad.

Ugh, never mind, network cable died between the upgrades, go figure

The motherboard in question is ZOTAC NM10-DTX WiFi [NM10-B-E] Had issues with release candidates too, had to use a special build with a different realtek driver. Thought it was resolved in the final. Noticed some other people posted having issues with the reported speed and stability of the connection with realtek cards. Syslog attached. I'm guessing the key bit is: Sep 23 11:22:43 Tower kernel: r8169: eth0: link down Any tips would be most welcome. syslog.txt

unRAID Server version 5.0-rc8a AiO doesn't see the network card either

Hi, I just installed 5.0-rc6-r8168-test today and the network card was not recognized. The motherboard in question is ZOTAC NM10-DTX WiFi [NM10-B-E] I rolled back to rc5 and everything works ok, below is the loaded driver: r8169 Gigabit Ethernet driver 2.3LK-NAPI loaded

I also have a permissions problem but I'm not sure if this is supposed to be expected behaviour or not. The problem becomes apparent when samba shares that are exposed via "Secure" security option. Let's assume I have a folder mounted as follows: //192.168.1.10/Downloads /mnt/tower/Downloads cifs username=downloads,password=downloads,_netdev 0 0 If I create a folder in that mounted folder, it gets created with the following permissions: drwxrwx--- 1 downloads users 48 2012-05-26 22:55 test/ Now even though the "users" group has the execute permission, if I try accessing that folder as a guest/anonymous user, I get an access denied error. What is peculiar is that this only happens with folders. Files that are created in the same fashion can be accessed by guest/anonymous users. This discrepancy leads me to believe that this is probably not intended behaviour. I have attempted setting the uid/gid to nobody/users in fstab as well, but the setting is ignored by unraid - the owner always ends up being the user that was used for mounting the share. Please let me know if I can provide any additional details.

I believe most people on these forums suffer from some degree of digital hoarding so if you find a good helpline do let us know But yes, what you say makes sense, and with the necessary RAID controllers it's a lot more expensive than running plain unRAID. You bring up a good point regarding mirroring the most important data. I'm in a similar situation where I have stuff of varying levels of importance, and just as you, pictures and docs are something I can't afford to lose. Initially I copied this stuff manually across most drives, but then my syslog just started filling up with duplicate file warnings. In the end I have a backup<disknr> folder on each disk and I rsync them as needed. This works but it could be done a lot better as it pollutes the samba shares list and involves some manual work. It would be ideal if unRAID actually had capability of mirroring important root folders. That way you could simply have an extra textfield where you define across how many drives you want to mirror that particular folder and unRAID would do the rest for you. But that's a discussion for the suggestions forum

Spectacular! Question though, I have been thinking about unRAID with larger arrays such as yours, and to be honest I wouldn't be perfectly happy with a redundancy of just 1 disk. Wouldn't something with multiple drive redundancy like raid6 be more appropriate in your scenario?

Nice, the OCD in me has awaken looking at your sweet cable management. I think I'll be off to buy some cable ties after work today And yes, it's amazing how much of a difference even a light breeze makes on the HDD temps. I have one 140mm fan cooling six HDDs and just changing that from a 600rpm one to a 900rpm one changed the temps by 5-10 degrees on average!

Not quite pimpin' yet, but it's getting there.... I opted for a Fractal Design Array R2. I replaced the original 140mm fan that came with it with a Thermalright X-Silent 140 which is just as quiet but pushes a lot more air. The temps are around 5-10 lower on average with it. Here it is front and back: I'm currently up to 3 drives in it, 3 more are waiting to be moved over from Drobo: And you can see poor Drobo spilling its guts and accepting its inferiority in front of the mighty unRAID box We had some good times, Drobo and I, but lately it was giving me too much grief so it was time to move on. One of the irks I have with it is the woefully inadequate cooling since the drives are practically sandwiched together. Here it is receiving a breath of fresh air: One note regarding the motherboard as well. I got the Zotac NM10-DTX before I read about all the problems with the on-board raid. So far I was able to attach multiple drives to it and have them appear individually. Unfortunately the LAST drive in the array does not respond to SMART commands for an unknown reason. Also, jumpered advanced format drives seem to be bringing the entire array down unless they are preformatted correctly. I'm still investigating that tissue.