tillkrueger

Thanks for clarifying, Dmitry. Interesting...I *wish* ZeroTier could do the job all on its own, but I do have to use OpenVPN (or Viscosity, as of late) to create a connection to my server *first* in order to be able to access my shares. When I have a little more time than I do right now, I shall follow your links and see whether the troubleshooting tips get me a step closer to figuring out why, in my setup, this isn't happening. It would be too cool if I could access all my unRAID resources locally by using *only* ZeroTier. Since the IT at the web-agency where my unRAID server is located had to create a custom openVPN certificate for me, is there a way to read such a cert into ZeroTier, and make it work that way, maybe?

Yeah, after reading up on it, I do understand that it’s not deduplicating files. one way or another, though, I doubt that trying to upload all of that data to the cloud (*any* cloud) again, will cost me months of my precious life...again.

Thank you so much for making this Docker! I'm new to ZeroTier and was so excited to find this! I do have a question/issue, though... normally I use Tunnelblick to connect to my unRAID server, which is hosted a a friend's web-agency here in Berlin, with an OpenVPN profile that his IT has created for me. until I installed and configured your Docker, I had to connect to the network the IT set up for me with Tunnelblick (internal IP is 172.25.123.123 there) and mount my unRAID with the Mac Finder's "Connect to Server..." menu item...always worked well. I notice that with ZeroTier running, the unRAID system appears both as an SMB and AFP share (the SMB share shows all user and disk shares, the AFP share only the unRAID user share) and also connects fine. my question: is it expected behaviour that I can only access my unRAID system when the Tunnelblick OpenVPN certificate is *also* running? I had hoped that ZeroTier alone might be enough to connect, but I guess it makes sense that I will still need to penetrate their Firewall by means of the OpenVPN cert first, in order to *then* take advantage of ZeroTier's features...or might there be something that their IT can do in order to combine the two into one, so that ZeroTier alone would get me there? I only ask because of the inconvenience of using Tunnelblick and losing many of my normal internet connections in the process, while being logged into their/my network there.

No, I have not yet talked to CP support about that possibility. Frankly, I have wasted so much of my life, these past few years, uploading 18TB of data into the cloud only to find that unlimited plans would turn into 5TB plans overnight (I'm looking at you, Bitcasa), or companies just go broke and go away, or what have ya, that I am taking a break from banging my head against the wall...when upload speeds of at least 5MB/sec. become the norm, I might take another look, but until then it is an exercise in futility.

well, since *all* of my 20TB of data is unique and original content that was created as part of over 20 years worth of productions, there is nothing to deduplicate (I have done my own deduplication of photos and other assets over the years), so the equation is pretty easy: 20TB = 20,000GB @ 1GB/hr = 20,000hrs = 833.33 days = 2.28 years ?

When you get this working, Djoss, would you mind telling me/us what upload performance you're getting? I cancelled my subscription for a refund after seeing that it took 15hrs for a 14GB folder, on a symmetrical 500Mbit connection. I wish it wasn't so, bc I don't see another unlimited solution out there, and certainly none that is supported with a nice unRAID container such as this one.

just finished getting a Windows 10 VM to work again, although I did have to start installing from scratch...not sure what was wrong with my other one, but I had to trash it. thanks to SpaceInvader One's excellent YouTube tutorial, this new one is running better than the previous ever did...what an excellent tutorial! after midnight here in Germany, but so worth the few hours of work on this. g'nite everyone, over and out...

and right you are, itimpi...now that you mention it, that was kind of the problem last year as well, until I went thourgh half a dozen VNC clients until I settled on "Screens" to connect with my VM. and low and behold, I was able to connect with Screens, yet again...only to find that there is something wrong with the actual VM itself, but at least I am now able to connect with it and will try to take it from here, maybe open another discussion if there is something specific I can't figure out. thank you itimpi for reminding me!

maybe so, Frank1940, but just to be sure, I changed the title in hope of not misleading so many people. like I said, it worked splendidly until recently, and suddenly I get this scene when noVNC opens. I even deleted the VM definition and set it up again, but same error...it must be something really small, so I hope someone can help me figure it out.

Not sure whether that discussion is what I am looking for. See, I faintly remember having had the same issue last year, when setting up the VM for the first time, and I had to re-create the VM a few times, after first installing Windows 10, until it did work. I don't want to have to install Windows 10 again and already have an 86GB vdisk1.img which worked really well until recently, so my question is what in my current settings might cause noVNC to immediately alert me that it failed to connect to the server...waiting for a few minutes to maybe let SMB "catch up", as it was suggested in the discussion you linked to, also has no effect. I think there may be some setting that isn't quite correct...I attached a screen cap of my VM settings page.

sorry, on *which* page? did you intend to send a link, or was it your way of saying "just search this forum"?

since I didn't get a single response yet, over in the KVM forum, I am cross-linking here in hope to reach a few more eyes: my Windows 10 VM stopped working, and I wonder why, and how to get it working again. I started this discussion in the KVM forum, but bc it gets so few views, I thought I'd link to it from here.

ok, so it took 15.5hrs to backup 15GB to CrashPlan Pro...this is from a machine that is connected to the internet with a symmetrical 1Gb connection, so that upload bandwidth on the sending end can't be the issue. is this dog-slow upload performance something that others here have also experienced, or what could be going on? needless to say that uploading almost 20TB of data at about 1GB/hr to CrashPlan Pro is a ludicrous task...it would take about 835 days or 2 years and 4 months...that can't be right. I know this is very unlikely to be the Docker's fault, but I'd be interested to find out what other users' experience with uploading to CrashPlan Pro has been.

the subtle UI improvements (I noticed how the Queue window got some nice visual upgrades) are much appreciated...this Docker just gets better and better, and I don't even know what goes on and is improved upon "under the hood" with very upgrade.

thanks for clarifying, Djoss...fine piece of work, and thank you very much for that!

But upon my next try, I was able to configure and start a first backup of one of my smaller sub-folders, just to get my feet back, and it's been happily backing up for almost an hour now while I've been able to snoop around the UI to get to know it a little bit. So after a couple of initial glitches, all appears to be running smoothly now.

I was excited to see this Docker, re-activated my CrashPlan account and updated to the Pro subscription, then installed and ran the Docker, entered my login credentials, replaced my previously used workstation with my unRAID server as the singular machine to back up from, and started to look around a bit before the WebUI became unresponsive. I went to my user-account online, changed the computer name from a cryptic number to "unRAID", then restarted the Docker and got back in to see the machine name has also changed to "unRAID" in the Docker (so the connection is sound), but while trying to configure the backup plan, the WebUI became unresponsive again. Before I keep going through this cycle of restarting the Docker, I thought I'd post my log file and ask the community what may be causing the WebUI to keep becoming unresponsive. service.log.0

just found and installed this great little Docker and am doing my first scan. I do have some questions: > once this rather lengthy scan is done (about 20TB of data), is it persistent by default, or will I have to do something to "save" the scanning results? (is that what "Write to cache file" is for, maybe?) > I am still scanning, so maybe that's why, but the menus become unresponsive at some point when I click my way through them, and I have gotten black screen artefacts in its UI...I am afraid to do a page-reload bc I don't know whether the progress is persistent (is it?), but is this expected behaviour while scanning is in progress? > I noticed the "Filemanager from here" menu item...does it have its own filemanager or does it somehow route me to my installed Krusader Docker? Since I do a lot of manual balancing of data between my disk shares, this Docker will be a lot of help as the Disk Usage function in Krusader isn't persistent and takes too long to be practical for my purposes.

You want to move only a subset of the cached data? Because, if I understand it correctly, the "Move now" button in the WebUI's Main > Array Operation tab will also invoke moving data from the cache to your user share(s). If you want to only move a subset, for some reason, then you could do it that way, I suppose, but I don't understand unRAID's cache'ing methodology well enough to be sure about that. You may want to wait for someone else, more experienced, to confirm that.

Hi francrouge I also had issues, initially, getting my path mappings right, although I *did* blindly follow the instructions of someone who told me how to accomplish what I wanted...but I was *also* well aware of one of the dangers which jonathanm referred to above...one of the most common newbie mistakes is to not fully understand the difference between disk and user shares, which can lead to data loss when copying or moving data between the two...I have only ever really copied/moved data between disk shares, because having a logical folder and file structure on every disk is something that is a must in media production...unRAID's way of allowing you to combine disks into logical user shares is something that I had been looking for after the number of disks I had filled up with data from my productions became progressively closer to unmanageable. While unRAID has been a God-sent for keeping my data safe, Krusader has been a God-sent for actually managing my data on unRAID directly...I am incredibly grateful to binhex for taking the already excellent Krusader up yet another level and making it feel like a truly modern in-browser application...it's very exciting to have such clean control over the fruits of 25 years of production-related data, if not to say *fun* to tweak its organisation. With that said, I am not sure what your current path mapping is, but for my own purposes, I found that the Host Path 2 mapping of /mnt/ that was suggested to me by someone who's name I don't recall, gives me access to all of my disk and user shares as well as the cache drive. And while I'm here, does anyone know whether/how I can change the name of the /media container?

Right again, binhex! I didn't look at the "Other" tab before, but found it to do exactly what I need. So cool, this Docker!!

den hatte ich glaube ich schon ausprobiert, ohne Erfolg, aber wenn ich wieder an meinem Computer sitze probiere ich den noch mal aus...danke! ist jetzt auch nicht *so* wichtig, aber mein lästiger Perfektionismus will die Klappe nicht halten. oops, sorry, I fell back into German, but as jonathanm (thank you!) already translated (quite well): I thought I had already tried that, albeit without success...as soon as I'm back at my computer, I'll re-confirm. it's not *that* important, of course...it's mostly my perfectionism not wanting to leave well-enough alone and refusing to shut up about it.

I was trying to find the parameter responsible for those but couldn’t find it...do you know that is accessible via the settings UI?

something entirely different and mundane: being a stickler for details and also a UI designer, would it be much trouble to include the background color of the column header and footer (which is now that garish blue) in the color settings? I would love to keep it all in monochrome tones...it's such a good-looking file-manger already, and that would make it perfect (in my beady eyes, anyway).

it’s the least I can do