JMO

not only do we not develop sabnzbd app itself, but this is all the more amusing given that you can easily change back to the old webui anyways. Hardly the point, is it. Feedback is feedback, just in this case it was misplaced. I've been enlightened as to the development process, that should have been sufficient enough a response.

Are you actually being serious?! You know we don't develop sabnzbd right? We just package it into a docker. From what I understand your complaints are to do with the updated sabnzbd webui, so would be far better placed directed at the sabnbzd developer. As linked in the first post. Clearly I was not aware of that. I'm not a programmer. I have no idea what the process of docker development, or app development for that matter, is. I'll take the feedback where it belongs.

Linuxserver (and all docker template maintainers for that matter) do not write the actual app themselves. They merely package it. This would need to be posted on Sab's forum. You can get to their page by hitting "Project Page" from within CA on the app Thanks for the information.

Hi, I suppose this thread is as good as any for posting feedback on this container. I've switched from Needo's SAB to try this out and while the process has been fairly painless, and the updated interface is somewhat refreshing, I do have a some criticisms of the overall UI. In general, the UI is pretty good, however there are a few issues that I have found bothersome: 1. Status and interface options>Web Interface. We may only have one extra queue column. This feels pretty arbitrary and I find it actually quite annoying. I like to see both the "category" and "priority" columns, but now I can't. 2. The multi-operations button (and subsequently, the means by which job priorities are changed). Earlier I had occasion to change the priority of 12 episodes of a television series. I clicked multi-operations to bring up the check-boxes, scrolled back up my queue (because bringing up the check-boxes dumps you to the bottom of the page), selected my episodes, scrolled back down, changed priority to high. Bob's your uncle. Too many steps, too much moving up and down the page. Additionally, I had the misfortune to click the check all button while I was just scrolling around the bottom of the page...which then set ALL my jobs to high priority. It was a learning experience that highlights another issue... 3. The priority dropdown box. If you use the multi-operation dropdown at the bottom of the page to change some job priorities and then wish to change some other jobs to different priorities you have to go to the top of the page, click the multi-operation button (to remove the check-boxes), click it again to bring them back, set the job priority, scroll back up and select the jobs. After which you then have to remember to click the multi-operations button to remove the check-boxes (or you can manually deselect all the jobs you just changed priority for)...just to be safe. 4. No text box to filter jobs. It is needed. 5. Why is job management split between the footer and header of the page? I've alluded to it already, having the functional parts of the multi-operations at the bottom of the page feels like bad design. Having said all that, it may be that there is functionaality that I have not quite discovered yet, or a workflow that I've not quite gotten used to that is detracting from my experience, so feel free to reply with suggestions . Please take these comments as constructive criticism. I am very appreciative of the work that the Linuxserver.io team puts into the docker community. Regards.

Hi, I have an issue with LL where I can no longer longer access the webui. I haven't changed any settings, although I think there may have been an auto-update occur. Regardless, it was working and now it isn't, with no input from me. Tried restarting, tried forced update, any suggestions?

Ahh, I understand now. No, not a flash drive, a SSD connected via USB 3 (https://www.startech.com/HDD/Adapters/USB-3-SATA-adapter-cable-with-UASP~USB3S2SAT3CB) That is some fantastic news. Looking forward to 6.2 coming off beta

No sata ports free, but I have two internal USB 3 connections available. Read write to an SSD cache is not even worth thinking about. I'm on a mini-itx platform and would prefer to use my lone PCIe expansion slot for a GPU.

So I came across an old post stating that is it is possible to make a USB drive act as a cache in Unraid. Is anybody able to elaborate on that? I am super keen to make it happen. I have no idea how to "mount a cache manually". Thanks.

Have you got anything working since then? I'm interested in using a similar setup just for a cache disk, so I can have all my 6 SATA ports for array disks. Using unassigned devices I mounted a 120GB SSD to use a a Plex cahce, and that has been running fine for months. AS far as my unraid cahce, I've not had the time to bother with it, but I would like to get an ssd slotted in.

Oh I agree, I'm not one looking to populate a NAS with 2.5" drives, so the CS280 didn't even get a second glance from me. Regarding the DS380, I have never been a fan of that case. Admittedly I was quite excited when it first made an appearance, but after going through numerous reviews, it just looks...painful to work on. I am currently rocking a node 804, which is also not without its foibles. The CS380 looks to offer excellent functional performance and good capacity. I guess my only (initial) criticisms would be styling and uncertainty with filtering on intakes (a filter that requires you to open the case to clean it is next to pointless imho), and nobody is putting that case in their HT cabinet to show it off. The CS380 is the kind of case that I have been waiting for. Modern HDD capacities are really negating the need to build 20 drive rackmount monsters for a lot of people (I considered it for a loooong time). Backplanes, room for cable management, easy HDD access, decent cooling. I am super keen to get some more details on this case.

http://www.pcper.com/news/Cases-and-Cooling/CES-2016-SilverStone-CS380-and-CS280-Enclosures Noice one, Silverstone.

Unassigned Devices are not mounted to /mnt/disk/ or /mnt/user/ and are not recognized as array managed shares. Unassigned Devices are mounted to /mnt/disks/ so your drive would be at /mnt/disks/VERTEX2_120gb. You don't have to share the drive to see it on the local computer and use it in a Docker. Referencing a drive / smb mount within docker may also require a restart of the entire docker engine for those mounts to be recognized within a container You guys are quick. I listed the share information for the sake of completeness, but thanks for the heads-up. /mnt/disks/ is empty when I browse in the host path. I again tried entering the location manually, but still cannot generate any activity on the drive during media playback. The dirve is showing as "spun-down" in unRAID. I realise it was ambiguous in my first post, but when I "did restart Docker" it was the Docker engine, and not just the Plex Docker. In the past few minutes I have restarted Docker again, and also restarted the Plex docker to no avail. EDIT: Docker setting | Plex Setting| unRAID Main Tab EDIT 2: So it now appears to be working. An additional entry appeared under /mnt/disks/. You can see in the screengrab my two manual entries, and then a third system generated one (the one with the transcode folder). What is weird is that on my Windows machine, \\TOWER\VERTEX2_ 120gb is empty (and stays empty during playback that is being transcoded). Progress has been made. Follow up attempt with the same file, no activity on the drive. Further, if I browse the drive in unRAID (by clicking on it on the Main tab), it shows as empty. Hmmm.

Hi, I have an SSD that I would like to mount on an internal USB 3.0 header. I haven't decided on a specific purpose for the device as yet, just sort of testing that I can get it working first. I am running unRAID 6.1.7 and Unassigned Devices plugin 2016.01.20. I did initially have an older version of the UD plugin, from the original author, that had some "issues". I have since uninstalled, rebooted and updated to my current version. Things start out well, the drive appears on the Main tab in unRAID and I have successfully formatted (xfs), renamed (VERTEX2_120gb) and mounted the drive all using the UD plugin. Here's a summary of the current plugin/drive settings: Destructive Mode: Disabled Enable SMB Security: No Enable NSF Export: Yes Automount: On Share: On The drive shows up fine on my network shares and I am able to rw without any dramas. My first real test has been to try and use the drive as a transcode location for the Limetech Plex docker. I used the Container volume /transcode. When I attempted to edit the docker settings the drive did not show up in my Host path. AFAIK it should be located at: /mnt/disk/VERTEX2_120gb/. (N.B. I did restart Docker after mounting the the SSD as my understanding is that Docker would not be aware of any drives that are mounted after it has started). In an effort to try and work around this I manually typed the location into my Host path hoping that this would effect a positive result. However, in all my testing on Plex, I have not been able to generate any activity on the drive and in fact, if I specify the transcode location (https://app.plex.tv/web/app#!/settings/server/.../transcoder) in Plex as /transcode all of my content refuses to play. I should also mention that initially I had renamed the drive "OCZ_SSD" and tried to use this as my host path (/mnt/disk/OCZ_SSD/), using the same manual method already mentioned. Now this might be expected behaviour, but when I currently attempt to browse to the SSD via Host path, in any docker, they all remember these manual entries. So I have two manually entered options of: /mnt/disk/OCZ_SSD/ and /mnt/disk/VERTEX2_120gb/ I get the feeling that as far as unRAID is concerned, neither of these locations have ever existed. Does anybody have any guidance they would care to offer? EDIT: This is how I am connecting the drive: StarTech USB3S2SAT3CB USB 3.0 to 2.5" SATA III Hard Drive Adapter Cable w/ UASP (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16812400542) Lian Li UC-01 USB 3.0 to 20-pin Adapter (http://www.lian-li.com/en/dt_portfolio/uc-01/)

That is a nifty bit of kit (not to poo-poo double sided tape). I could see those working very well in a serious water-cooling setup, allowing drive cages to be tossed. Even just for better air-flow. They certainly make use of what is usually wasted space for a lot of pc-cases.

IcyDock has a small range of these brackets: http://www.icydock.com/goods.php?id=140

I read that Unassigned Devices thread. Some good stuff in there. The Docker community is amazing. So I have bought: 2 * StarTech USB3S2SAT3CB USB 3.0 to 2.5" SATA III Hard Drive Adapter Cable w/ UASP (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16812400542) 1 * Lian Li UC-01 USB 3.0 to 20-pin Adapter (http://www.lian-li.com/en/dt_portfolio/uc-01/) I will post back how I get on.

Are you aware of any likelihood that USB support might be added in the future, or is it more of a technical limitation? USB 3.0 offers theoretical throughput of 5Gbps and 3.1 ups that to 10Gbps. Not to mention that USB 3.1 can delver up 100W of power of one cable. Now I'm not too sure about any extra overheads that might be involved when comparing USB to Sata III or Sata Express and NVMe drives (in terms of performance). However, USB seems to be less of the ugly duckling that it once was. I really wanted to sit a couple of SSD's on my internal USB header, I'm still coming to terms with the shattering of my dream ;. Is that a new limitation? For several months I was running my docker.img and docker data from an SSD I had mounted outside of my array with SNAP. It ran fine until the old and repurposed SSD died (damn you OCZ). EDIT: Yeah, I did that with Sata drives, not USB drives....

I see. That's a shame. Thanks for the breakdown. I have mounted devices outside of the array before, using both SNAP and Unassigned Devices. Be nice to get that extra little bit of functionality. Thanks again.

Hi, I am investigating the possibility of using my internal USB 3.0 header to add a couple of internal USB 3.0 HDD's. Basically plugging something like this in: http://www.startech.com/Cables/USB-3.0/2-Port-Internal-USB-3-Motherboard-Header-Adapter-Cable~USB3SMBADAP6 After a bit of googling and browsing through the forums here, I have not turned up much recent information on this subject. Can anybody advise if this can be done and offer any reasons for/against it? My build is in my signature, I do have a free PCIe slot, so an expansion card is the obvious alternative to using USB 3.0. However, I am considering some other uses for that slot (if possible). Cheers (and happy New Years!), -JMO EDIT: The purpose of the USB drives would be for a cache and/or docker. It would be interesting to setup up a Raid0 USB 3.0 array for cache...just because . EDIT 2: " internal USB 3.0 HDD's" = essentially any 2.5" drive connected over a 'sata to USB3' cable (e.g. http://www.startech.com/HDD/Adapters/USB-3-SATA-adapter-cable-with-UASP~USB3S2SAT3CB)

The "Libraries" are windows libraries. Not to be condescending, but for the sake of clarity: windows libraries are essentially collections of directory bookmarks, they have no bearing on my unraid file structure (and indeed should not be considered in anyway to be a part of unraid as they are specific to the client machines(s) and not located on unraid at all). Nothing is actually "stored" in a windows library, they are simply references. Noted. Working towards it as time permits. Need to check the correct procedure. Gotten as far as a completed parity check. Side note, my friend that pushed me to get unraid is a big advocate of simply running the latest version, whatever it is. I am coming to realize that his advice is maybe not the best and I should simply stick with the latest stable release. In this case, 6.1.3. In fact, I am becoming more of a mind to not update at all (once I have gotten a stable release) unless there is a significant improvement in functionality or major bug fix. It's a learning experience for somebody that had zero Linux exposure prior.

Total Array of four disks (including parity disk) + cache disk. Actual disk labels are Disk 1, Disk 3 and Disk 4. I retired 3 small disks some time ago and replaced them with a single larger capacity drive. disk1 ->Movies/Movie A/EMPTY disk3 ->Movies/Movie A/EMPTY disk4 ->Movies/Movie A/EMPTY is the exact scenario. Cache drive is next to empty. Beside which, the files I am looking at are older than the cache drive. It's really bugging me.

Hi, 6.0-beta12 I just happened to be browsing my data on exported unraid disks in windows 7 today and noticed that many of the folders on the disks appear to be empty. disk1 ->Movies/Movie A/EMPTY disk2 ->Movies/Movie A/EMPTY disk3 ->Movies/Movie A/EMPTY Yet, Libraries\Movies\Movie A\All expected files, and also, Plex has no problems with playback of the file(s). In addition, if I log into the Unraid GUI and go to Shares->View->/mnt/user/Movies, Unraid will specify the location(s) for the files and show them as existing. Can anybody explain to me why I cannot see the files on the disks?

It's completely shit. I did not have this issue in WHS 2011 (which is not is MS's list). Go figure. Such a pain in the butt. Thank you for the information. Again, thanks for the info. I will have to give this some thought. I'm not sure if I am quite ready to disable or uninstall the credentials manager.

Yes. I am attempting to emulate that very thing in unraid.

A pure windows network does not suffer from such issues. EDIT: Well, actually, it might. However, prior to unraid I was running WHS and never had this issue with controlling share access. IS there no solution?