live4soccer7

Yeah, there are many different ways you can configure them. I looked at the photos/configs when I initially got the unit and didn't see anything referencing connecting the two IOM modules on the same shelf together.

That what I had originally thought as well, but had read a thread somewhere saying someone connected the two IOM6 modules. There were no details or additional information, so he/she may definitely be wrong. Figured I would look into it and see if anyone knew or if I could find supporting documentation. @JorgeB Thanks for always answering pretty much all my questions lately. I've just been doing a lot of restructuring and updating decade old equipment from when I first got started with unraid.

With the netapps, they have two IOM6 modules. I currently have an HBA that is connected to the top module's "square" marked QSFP+ port (I think that's the cable, my memory can't remember everything, lol). That's the only cable I have hooked to the whole thing. Should I then connect the top module's "circle" port to the bottom modules "square" port? If so, will this increase write speed to the array/disks (pooled devices, not in the unraid array)? Or is this more of a redundancy thing? or none of the above.

Yes, I completely agree. I am mounting the shares in the clients fstab.

I have a couple windows machines and the transfer speeds to the smb shares are always 100MB/s +. I setup nfs and also smb on ubuntu, but the speeds are roughly half that of a windows machine.. From windows, I'm basically saturating the gig speeds. It's not a bad cable as I have multiple ubuntu installs that have the same issue. Surely, I'm needing to add a parameter to the fstab file. Any ideas or anyone willing to share their fstab line for their share (nfs or cifs) that gets gig transfer speeds?

It is the SAS2-EL2. It was very difficult to see and even then it was a blurry image through my phone camera.

I just checked the global settings and while you can set it to SAT, you can not specify "12" in the global setting. My guess is that it wouldn't work properly. Luckily, this will get fixed in the next release.

I am not sure. I thought about changing to global setting, but I also have 25 or so other disks a part of the unraid array that I didn't want to lose data for. I would imagine the global setting would persist. I would like to run smart tests on all 48 disks and be able to see the temps. The smart tests for now because the unit is newer and the seller said he would replace and disks that failed the smart test.

Thanks. I have compared pics and given the serial number and the build model number to supermicro and everything indicates SAS2 EL1

Any major issues with v6.10-rc1? I'm kind of needing that to work to help report issues with disks from smart reports.

I have a scenario where I have to change from the "default" settings on the spin up and spin down settings when you click into a disk. Same things for SMART test controller. I change the settings and then once I go back into their they are set back to say "Default". I have clicked apply in that specific section the settings applies to. I have then tried clicking "done" and also just going back to the main tab. If they do persist, it is only for a few minutes/hours and then they seem to revert back to say "Default". Any ideas? Edit: I'm usually trying to change these when the array has already been started.

That's sort of what I've grasped from all of this. haha. I was thinking share parameters/ownership or whatever was applied during a file transfer and not strictly based on the share being created and the file just being transferred to that folder.

I did mv. Gone, no where to be found. I was using MC. same file. I thought, well I'll be sure all these files are a part of the share. That was definitely not the correct thinking. lol. It isn't a big deal because I can reproduce the data, but it does put me about a week back.

This: If you mix user shares and disks when moving/copying files, you can actually lose data, because Linux doesn't realize that the source path and the destination path might actually be the same file, and so tries to overwrite what it is trying to read. This is often referred to as the User Share Copy Bug. I tried it out of curiosity, pretty sure lost that data. It wasn't a ton though, so not a big deal. I've been searching the whole server for it.

I'm curious, what happens or doesn't happen if you go from disk shares to user shares or vice versa?