Jump to content

dlandon

Community Developer
  • Posts

    10,223
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    20

Posts posted by dlandon

  1. 16 minutes ago, d3m3zs said:

    How can I fix it?

    "ZFS file systems have built-in mechanisms such as periodic scrubs, snapshots, and metadata updates that can prevent disks from entering standby mode. These operations are designed to maintain data integrity and can cause disk activity even when the system is idle, keeping the disks from entering low-power states."

     

    That being said, UD has to check unassigned disks when it polls for various status and may be triggering a zfs disk operation.  It acts differently from a pool disk because UD disks come and go and pool disks are static and only change when the array is started or stopped.  If the UD disk is not mounted, you can detach it and that will put it into a standby mode.  If it is always mounted, I would suggest moving the disk to a pool disk.

     

    I notice some disk read operations when a zfs disk is unmounted, and I may put a little time into understanding what UD is doing that might cause that.

  2. 1 hour ago, shingaling said:

    The weirdest thing:

    A reboot on my second unraid server doesn't auto-mount any NFS shares (see attached diagnostics)

    A reboot on my first unraid server auto-mounts only one of the 2 servers that have nfs shares (issue as described above by you)

    Your wait timer before mounting remote shares is 30 seconds.  Make that several minutes and see if that's enough time for things to get settled and allow the mounts.

     

  3. 1 hour ago, shingaling said:

    Actually, after powerfailure/on reboot none of them mount.

    But when I go into Unraid and even just click on "Add NFS Share", refresh the available NFS-Servers, Select one, and then cancel the procedure .... suddenly all mounts from this server are found again, and the "MOUNT"-button turns from grey to orange,

    But it doesn't find them by itself on reboot/power failure-restart

    It looks to me like the remote shares are auto mounting because 30 seconds after UD says it's waiting 30 seconds, the remote shares start mounting.

    But two did not mount.

     

    Then I see where you loged in and mounted two manually:

    1 hour ago, shingaling said:

    Is there anything that can be done for UD to find the NFS-Shares again by itself, to automount them?

    Yes.  There may not be long enough time waiting for the remote server to be available.  There is a UD setting that sets how long UD will wait to mount remote shares.  Currently you have it set for 30 seconds:

    Mar  8 07:32:10 Monolith-6 unassigned.devices: Waiting 30 secs before mounting Remote Shares...

    The setting is 'Remote share mount wait time' in Settings->Unassigned Devices.

     

    UD will also attempt to update the online status before trying to mount remote shares, so it should automatically get the current status before mounting.

  4. 16 minutes ago, shingaling said:

    Hi  

    I noticed, that after a power failure & (auto)restart of my Server (NUC), the NFS-Shares (on local Synologys) do not get mounted automatically. I use the U(nassigned)D(evices) Plugin, all NFS-Shares are set on automount.

    What can I do, so the NFS-Shares get mounted "by themselves"? 

     

    PS: I also noticed, that the NFS-Shares don't get mounted on reboot ... Do I need to set  /etc/fstab-entries, like in linux? then again I would think the plugin is there for that.

    any help is welcome 

    Post diagnostics.

  5. 2 hours ago, Johnny4233 said:

    Hi,

     

    getting some trouble too.

     

    i was using the docker container for tail scale. was working flawless. since a few days it stops working. I switched to this plugin version. same problem.

     

    i connect 2 unraid server together. then I want to mount a share with unassigned devices. 

     

    Ping Unraid <-Tailscale-> Unraid works good. connection ok.

     

    But unassigned devices say, mount point is offline... 

    in network settings, I set the network extra "tailscale0"...

     

    but there seems a setting I missed? the past 1 year it was working good. 

     

    any idea? 🙂

    The method for determining if a remote server share is available has changed from a ping to checking if the port is open for SMB on the remote server.  Check that SMB is enabled on your remote server.  Also, be sure port 445 is open on the remote server and it is not being blocked by tail scale or a firewall.

  6. 8 hours ago, mftovey said:

    Actually, all USB ports are empty except for the one that holds the unRAID jump drive.  There is no card reader attached.  This started out displaying only one of these Generic drives, then a second one appeared, later the third appeared, and now there are four.  I suspect these are artifacts left over from attaching and removing a jump drive,  There must be a way of removing them from memory but I can't find a way yet.

    Do the following:

    • Post diagnostics.
    • Click on the double arrows icon in the upper right of the UD page.
  7. 57 minutes ago, Anon said:

    I did the Upgrade via the internal updater. The update was succcessfull but the error is sadly still there :/

     

    Idea: Is it possible to just delete all contents of the config?

    If so I would back up the current config. Then delete everything. Reboot. Set up one share to export and create one test user.

     

    That way I could test that smb at least works if I start completely fresh.

    Then I either go from there and manually configure everything again.

    Or I can copy over a few of the backed up files (depending on which are safe to copy back and which could be related to the smb error)

     

    If it were me, I'd boot in safe mode and verify SMB was working, then add back plugins and dockers until it stops.

  8. 1 minute ago, Anon said:

     

    - Could it be a viable idea to just make a fully fresh system with the USB-Flash Creator (V. 6.12.8) and then copy the config files from the current backup (V 6.12.6) onto it?

    Yes.

     

    1 minute ago, Anon said:

     

    Another Idea would be to use the internal Upgrade System that is available. It is showing me that the new version is available but I am not sure if it will be as fresh of a system as writing it completely new.

    That won't change the configuration, but will update the system and might be worth a try.  I would do this of the two choices.

  9. 12 hours ago, Frank1940 said:

    Let me ping @dlandon as he seems to have some knowledge in the area.  I don't think he is based in the USA so it may be a while before he responses...

    I'm actually in Texas, US of A.

     

    I really don't see anything in the diagnostics that necessarily indicates an SMB issue.  I'm leaning towards a network/routing issue.

     

    I see a few things that should be checked/confirmed:

    • Gateway is 192.168.50.1 but DNS server is 192.168.50.5.  Is this correct?
    • It appears the router is supplying the Unraid IP because Unraid is setup to use DHCP?
    • You have said you can ping and log into Unraid so I'm confused why SMB wouldn't work, especially when using the IP address.

    There is a domain defined - 'loesle'.  I suspect this may have been from using AD at some point and is left over.

     

    You might try re-configuring SMB Settings.  Change a setting and the apply it to regenerate the config file.  Do the same for your network settings.

     

    As a side note, your access to Unraid is limited to http://.  Redo the 'Management Access" settings and enable https://.

  10. There are several things that can affect SMB performance.  Some of these things are:

    • Network issues.
    • SMB configuration.
    • Unraid array configuration.

    I've seen a lot of mis-configured and poor network configurations.  This can have an impact on what appears to be SMB issues.  The biggest issue with networking I see is users trying to set up Jumbo frames and don't get it right.

     

    The way you have your shares set up can affect performance.  The "Allocation Method" for distributing files in the array can have an impact.  I believe the "High-water" method tends to be faster.

     

    As for SMB configuration, Unraid configures SMB to be most compatible.  Making the SMB Extras adjustments suggested above can help in a particular situation, but would not be the "most compatible".  The "store dos attributes = no" setting turns off the following settings if they are on:

            map archive = Yes
            map hidden = No
            map readonly = no
            map system = No

    These are the default Unraid settings, so the only one that is changed is the "map archive".  This is the DOS file system archive bit.

     

    As for the "ea support = no", this disables extended file attributes.  Extended file attributes are used on xfs and btrfs file systems in Linux and turning this off may impact their operation in Unraid depending on what applications are using the Unraid files and if they need extended attributes.

     

    So while I appreciate that maximum SMB speed is desireable, applying these "tweaks" to Unraid is not in the best in the interest of compatibility.  You are free to do these tweaks in SMB Extras for your particular needs with the understanding of the potential downside.

     

    The calls for action "why don't the Unraid devs fix this", is a tough one for Limetech:

    • Samba is open source software that Limetech has no control over.
    • The Samba team has to pretty much reverse engineer SMB because Microsoft is not that forthcomming about SMB functionaliy.
    • Limetech configures SMB the best it can based on keeping the most compatibility.

    If we can come up with SMB configurations that can help with responsiveness and maintain compatibility, we can definitely implement that.

     

    There is one SMB setting I've implemented in UD that might help.  If someone can spin up a UD disk and share it with SMB and let me konw if the browsing is improved I can work on implementing that in core Unraid.  The setting is:

    vfs objects = dirsort

    An SATA disk would be best because USB disks tend to be slower.  Be sure to have MacOS compatibility turned off because it blocks this setting.

     

    You can't set this manually in SMB Extras because it overwrites other "vfs objects" settings in SMB since SMB Extras are global settings.  The downside to the setting is that there is more processing time to sort the directories.  I suspect this is similar to the Windows indexing.

     

    EDIT: Another setting to try is "Case-sensitive Names" in Share Settings.  Read the setting Help by clicking on the setting description and see if a different setting will help.

  11. 12 minutes ago, trosma said:

    Hi, my friends.

    I use a script to automatically back up my data when I connect my external USB disk. It works really well! But now, I'm trying to enhance the script to do the same thing while also encrypting the information.

    Honestly, I don't have any idea how to do this. Is something like the following possible?

    tar -cz $BACKUPDIR | gpg --encrypt -r $RECIPIENT_EMAIL | dd of="$BACKUP_DIR/backup-$(date +%Y%m%d).tar.gz.gpg"
    

     

    Format the disk as an encrypted disk.

    • Upvote 1
  12. 36 minutes ago, Renegade605 said:

    Hey @dlandon, I made a bug report for this but it occurs to me it might be an unassigned devices plugin issue. I was a bit panicked as I wrote the bug report and troubleshooted in real time, but the fact that it was the mounting step that seems to have caused the problem makes me think that, now that I have a clear head.

     

    All the details here: 

     

    I'm not seeing how this is a UD problem.  Enlighten me.

  13. 6 hours ago, jv6478 said:

    Hey all! Great plugin and thank you for your time.

     

    I'm wondering if the plugin logs previously-opened files. I used File Activity and realized that one of my movie files was opened. Almost exactly 30 mins (my spin-down setting) after, the related disk spun down. This suggests the file was kept open for a short period of time, I think.

     

    When checking Open Files, I wasn't able to see that file shown as open. This may be because it was open for a short time and I missed it. To confirm if that is the case, I'm wondering if there is a log that shows some history that can be accessed.

     

    Thanks in advance!

    That's what FIle Activity does.

×
×
  • Create New...