johnny121b

Members
  • Content Count

    347
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

5 Neutral

About johnny121b

  • Rank
    Member

Converted

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

1569 profile views
  1. Title kinda sums it up. System runs fine. 3 dockers (PLEX, NZBGET, SONARR) work fine w/ no delay. Only the HTTP page is SO SLOW it's almost unusable. It can take several minutes to load the dashboard. Saw mention of something similar that was a USB controller issue, but my log file has something different than the other users' incident. Any ideas or pointers would be welcomed. Thanks! Apr 15 03:44:36 tower kernel: mce: [Hardware Error]: Machine check events logged Apr 15 04:03:10 tower kernel: mce: [Hardware Error]: Machine check events logged Apr 15 04
  2. I don't have an answer, but have a similar problem. I landed here while searching for an explanation RE: why my HTTP interface has slowed. I'm also seeing loads of 'docker0 port 1 ......entered blocking/forwarding/disabled state' messages in my log. My dockers seem to load/work correctly, but clicking on anything in the http interface- means a wait of about 60-seconds. DASHBOARD -> MAIN = wait 60 seconds......MAIN -> SHARES = wait 60-seconds.....you get the idea. Wondering if you stumbled upon a solution?
  3. The ability to configure shares' schedules such-that, their security settings shift from, say, SECURE <-> PUBLIC during scheduled windows....possibly only for certain users. My use-case; I routinely copy new movie/TV files onto my server from my PC. Each time, I have to manually change my shares' settings from SECURE to PUBLIC to give myself write access.....and revert the setting when I'm finished. The remaining 99% of the time, I want my server to DENY write access to everyone, including myself. I do this to help keep my server safe from any ransomware that might inf
  4. Go to: SETTINGS | NETWORK | List of IP addresses and networks that are allowed without auth Add the IP addresses you wish to have UNauthenticated access (to work when PLEX servers are down) Example; 192.168.1/255.255.255.0 to allow anything in-house to access regardless of PLEX site condition....if your internal network is 192.168.1.xxx
  5. +1 for the idea. .....even something so basic as the ability to RENAME files in the array, would be helpful. To help protect my server from ransomware, I keep my shares set to prevent even ME from easily changing the files. And I'm not a fan of Midnight Commander, especially with longer filenames.
  6. What's the one thing you WISH you could change about unRAID?
  7. I wonder- Is that first licensee STILL using UnRAID? THAT would be quite the testament!
  8. +1 for the 'intermittently stops while unpacking' issue. For me, this is a longstanding problem- many months. I've gotten into the habit of deleting the download and later telling nzbget to 'download ramaining files' to return it to the queue. Still, it stinks knowing that I MUST check the docker at least once a day, or things will pile up. I REALLY hope something shakes-out on this situation soon, because I know I suck at configuring/understanding dockers. And I KNOW... that if I have to switch to another docker, I'm gonna have a devil of a time making it play nicely with binhex's sonar
  9. Any plans for adding support for LTO backup? Speaking as a data hoarder, I know my server has grown to a size such-that a catastrophic failure would be almost impossible to recover from, yet 1:1 backup options are limited IF you want LONG TERM storage. Hard drives don't last for decades in cold storage, and I suspect many of us are only one good power surge away from disaster. A UPS and power conditioner transformer only protect you so far.
  10. Neither. I run it on a micro Dell (Inspiron 3050), whose only purpose is to back up my array. I figure- it uses almost no power, it saves me the headache of setting up a VM (which I've not proven very good at doing), doesn't impact my server's performance, plus it gave my 3050 a purpose...I had the thing, but couldn't decide how to use it. I have it physically atop my server, sharing a small, dedicated 5-port switch, so that mountain of data doesn't have to move across my entire network during backups. I start a backup (using remote desktop) then log in periodically.
  11. I'd like to leave my shares set to SECURE 99% of the time, with an easy way to allow myself access on-the-fly to edit filenames, move files, replace files, etc..... but return the system back to a secure state with a click. Ideally, I'd like something as simple as a button I could click, that would open-up write-access on my /movie & /TV shares so I can do what I need to do, then just as easily....click a button and return things to SECURE. -I- am the biggest security risk on my network, but -I- also need to frequently fix filenames and replace files with better copies. A cl
  12. Currently, my server is set up with most shares set to 'SECURE'. When I add a movie to my server, I begin the process by launching a batch file that creates the \movie share on my cache drive (if it doesn't already exist), and I copy the movie directly to the cache drive. The movie then gets moved into the array overnight by the mover script. This effectively isolates my array's movie files from ME. I figure IF I were to ever become infected with something nasty, only my cache drive contents could be at-risk. This works well for single-level shares like \movies or \documentaries or \appz.
  13. Seems like a big step backwards (producing a kernel that only works with older/smaller drives), but I [am] inclined to believe the issue exists; not between controller <-> drive but between O/S <-> drive.....or between O/S <-> controller. That is, until your reassurance.
  14. I don't believe any incompatibility exists between the controller and my drives. Since last year's attempted update, three of my drives have been upgraded to 8Tb models- without issue. Out of curiosity, is there a specific reason you're still at 6.5.3? I (do) notice that my current 6.3.5 only tells me that 6.5.3 is available for update......wondering why it doesn't say 6.6.7; coincidence or is it some line in the sand, for reasons I'm not aware-of?
  15. I'm running 6.3.5.....mostly because I hit a brick wall w/ a 6.5.3 upgrade attempt last year. Back then, I learned the SAT2-MV8 had compatibility issues with the kernel. IS anyone successfully using the SAT2-MV8 (PCI-X) controllers in their 6.6.x system? Don't wanna go down that rabbit hole again if it's still a hopeless effort. Thanks!