TaterSalad

Members
  • Content Count

    40
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About TaterSalad

  • Rank
    Newbie

Converted

  • Gender
    Undisclosed
  1. Well. I pulled the trigger. I was able to score an open box deal on NewEgg for the motherboard and saved $50. Hopefully, it won't be too sketchy. If it is, I will just return and order a new one. I combined the open box deal with the Jet.com TRIPLE15 promotion for the other components, which ended up saving me another $75. (You can save up to $90 with this promotion, but I wasn't able to maximize the promotion. The motherboard wasn't available on Jet.com. It's a great deal if you're looking for a new build.) Anyways, here's what I ended up with: Xeon E3-1245 v5 CPU ASRock C23
  2. ECC RAM is pretty much the same cost as non-ECC RAM these days, so I'd definitely consider switching. Anyways, I think I'm closing in on a configuration. I priced out some low, medium and high-end options. I could have gone lower and cheaper, but those specs ended up not being worth it for me. The low option is not a bad choice, but I think I could get longer life from these medium and high-end options. Low PROS: + Motherboard connectivity WiFi, Bluetooth, USB Type-C, and m.2 + Cheapest CONS: - Slowest Passmark at 7652 - No ECC - No hyperthreading - only 6 S
  3. I priced out a ES-1245v5 / ASRock C236 build and it's about $170 more at $746. PassMark showing a score of 10053. And the ES-1245 has Hyperthreading. So tempting... Besides the extra performance boost, the hyperthreading, and ECC benefits, is there any other benefits that I should be considering?
  4. Thanks to you all! Here's some comments on your suggestions. True, but the Z170 also has a m.2 slot while the ASRock does not. So, the difference is arguably 6 SATA+1 m.2 vs 8 SATA ports. m.2 is attractive for a cache drive or any fast I/O VMs. 8 SATA is nice, but it's hard for me to justify the extra cost for that additional port. Agreed, but I'm having a hard time justifying the extra costs of ECC and the server-grade board. I too have been running non-ECC for a long time without issue. You're probably right. I guess I am dreaming on 2x32GB suppor
  5. I'm building a Q25B system and looking for some advice in another thread. If anyone has any thoughts, I'd greatly appreciate it! (Sorry for the double post, but this thread seems way more active. The items I'm looking at are on-sale and the sale ends tomorrow.)
  6. It cracks me up how these types of chassis still have a HDD activity LED. Yes, one of your 45 HDDs is active.
  7. Hello! I'm a long-time unRAID user and I'm looking for some advice for my next SFF build. Hardware Goals small ITX build with room for at least five 3.5" HDDs (moving my existing HDDs over) I'd also like room for a full size dedicated graphics card (future purchase) but I want to have my cake and eat it too. I want all of this in the smallest possible package. dual-nics are a must for pfSense VM. Intel chipset preferred (no Realtek crap) I also want an ITX board that supports mor than 32GB RAM. But that doesn't seem to exist in LGA1071... Software Goals I plan to
  8. Back in business! Drives mounted and all data is there. Thank you, JoeL. How many petabytes of data have you collectively saved from your top-notch advice? Thanks again.
  9. Ran unraid_partition_disk.sh in test mode and got the following output: [root@tower ~]# ./unraid_partition_disk.sh /dev/sdc ######################################################################## Model Family: SAMSUNG SpinPoint F2 EG series Device Model: SAMSUNG HD103SI Serial Number: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Firmware Version: 1AG01118 User Capacity: 1,000,204,886,016 bytes
  10. Here are my results from fdisk -lu [root@tower ~]# fdisk -lu /dev/sdc Disk /dev/sdc: 1000.2 GB, 1000204886016 bytes 1 heads, 63 sectors/track, 31008336 cylinders, total 1953525168 sectors Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00000000 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdc1 64 1953525167 976762552 83 Linux Partition 1 does not end on cylinder boundary. [root@tower ~]# fdisk -lu /dev/sdd Disk /dev/sdd: 1000.2 GB
  11. I honestly can't remember. However, your comment did make me notice something else. In the past, my MBR for my data disks has said MBR: unaligned but now it is showing as MBR: 4K-aligned. Could that be the issue?
  12. Back story: I dual boot my UNRAID box with Windows. I occasionally need to boot into Windows. This normally works fine. However, I made the mistake this time of not disconnecting my UNRAID drives before booting into Windows. I am guessing this may have corrupted my filesystems. After booting back into UNRAID and starting the array, my 4 data disks now show as Unformatted. # reiserfsck --check /dev/md1 ..says I need to do an --rebuild-sb. Checking the others disks with reiserfsck say the same. Should I try a --rebuild-sb ? Do I issue this against /dev/mdX while the array i
  13. Glad I was of help. I had the exact same problem and it took a few days (and a few forum posts) for me to get it right. I am not sure if this is something that affects everyone or not. If it does, adding Device Drivers -> Multiple Device Support -> (*) Multiple devices driver support (unRAID) and <M> RAID support should definitely be added to the Wiki. Can anyone more versed on the subject comment?
  14. Do you see a /proc/mdcmd ? If not, that means your kernel was not properly built and unRAID didnt get implemented into it. In the 5.06a guide, I had to add the following in my make menuconfig: Device Drivers -> Multiple Device Support -> (*) Multiple devices driver support (unRAID) and <M> RAID support Watch your build and make sure unRAID gets implemented. You should see something like this compile: drivers/md.c And something about unRAID later...
  15. Ah. Good thinking Joe. Judging by the output from reiserfsck, it looks like it did some modification to /dev/sde. Are any of those modifications any thing to be concerned about? Also, does mkmbr need to be run on parity too? or just data disks?