Jump to content

tr0910

Members
  • Content Count

    1378
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by tr0910

  1. tr0910

    unorganized

    Once the beta is finished, can we expect a normal release of 6.7.3 ? Sent from my chisel, carved into granite
  2. I replaced the dual PSU in mine with a single standard atx quiet Platinum rated PSU. This made a huge difference in noise. A bit of work as it's not drop in. I never touched the fan wall as that would have only made a minor improvement. Regarding the low power CPU, don't waste your time on that. Especially if the low power version costs more. At idle they are about the same, they just don't have the headroom. Why pay more for slower. Your disks during parity checks are where most of the heat will come from Sent from my chisel, carved into granite
  3. What would we add to have it also grab LUKS headers from unassigned disks mounted? Correction, it seems to already do unassigned disks. Awesome...
  4. @dlandon I never meant to suggest you were responsible for this issue. At one time I heard that @limetech planned to integrate Unassigned Devices (UD) into the core product. Perhaps this has been pushed out. Heroes like yourself bear way too much burden from us greedy users. (please, just one more tiny change to UD.... LOL) Still the bottom line persists. As I said earlier, (more of us are using the product in ways that the original security design never intended) and this results in demands for tightening up the security of the core product. This is not a bad thing, but it does consume resources of our hero volunteers, and from Limetech. I was only wanting to raise this issue while we were all paying attention. I have been able to work with what we have for UD encryption. I admit that now I use UD for more than I used to, and this results in me passing encrypted UD disks between servers. Provided you accept the limitations, it works.
  5. unRaid has never been sold as a secure OS that should be exposed directly to the internet. However more and more of us are using the product in ways that the original security design never intended. I don't share the panic regarding plain text passwords in /root that has been discussed here recently, however now that we are all paying attention, let me explain something that is a larger concern. When unRaid introduced LUKS encrypted disks for the array, I immediately implemented on one server that could benefit from increased security. I have been running encrypted disks without problem since that time. This server also has a number of unassigned disks that are connected and disconnected from the server. Thanks to @dlandon we managed to get unassigned devices to support LUKS drives as well. But there is one huge problem. The unassigned devices require that all disks use the array LUKS password or keyfile. This is not good especially when we move disks from server to server. You can only use LUKS encrypted unassigned disks if the array already has at least one disk encrypted. And this password/keyfile must be the same on all servers where the disk is plugged into. This should be looked at if further enhancements are being made to the encrypted file system.
  6. Have used unRaid since 2010 using 1gb RAM servers on 4.47 with 1tb drives. Currently have 6 Pro licenses. But each Pro license can do so much more these days that some of the licenses are sitting quietly as spares for future use. The last few years has seen some real moves forward with the capabilities. VM's and dockers are awesome. And the fact that unRaid can support multi-CPU server hardware with 512gb or more RAM makes each PRO license go a long ways. unRaid, you're all grown up now...
  7. Awesome Sent from my chisel, carved into granite
  8. 1-3 covered by UnRaid with Dockers and plugins and VMs. Remote access is also possible however secure solutions to 100% access require research and care. There is no single switch to turn this on. Parity will protect you from drive failure, but not from user error, theft, fire or water damage. Backups are still required for important data. UnRaid is a data downloaders dream and media consumption tool. Sent from my chisel, carved into granite
  9. You may have been fooled by caching. My dual Xeon 2670 with 96gb ram will show wildly different write speeds depending on ram available. The first 50-75gb is being written to the ram cache and happens at a much faster speed. Also a write to a non array drive will happen significantly faster than an array drive where parity needs to be calculated. Overall I can't say I notice my encrypted drives being any slower to write than my non encrypted drives. There must be some slow down but on my system it isn't noticed. Sent from my chisel, carved into granite
  10. Yes Enterprise equipment is best. Buying last generation castoffs is highly recommended. Buying new today without the benefit of Dell like buying power is going to cost more than most will want to spend. Finding the right castoffs is the challenge. Servethehome forums are a good place to find the details on the hardware hitting the market Sent from my chisel, carved into granite
  11. You are on the right track. Most of this old server stuff is solid as a rock, and most will work fine. I would go one gen newer though with Intel 2670 gen E5 cpu. The power usage will be less than half and the cost will still be reasonable. Ask about the disk controllers as you won't want ones limited to 2tb. Oh and yes they will be noisy, so knowing your options ahead of the game is recommended. Some can be easily fixed some can't. Sent from my chisel, carved into granite
  12. You definitely can exclude a drive from parity by making it cache as already mentioned, or if you already have a cache disk, by managing it with the unassigned devices plugin. Either way you will be doing the new config process and needing to do a fresh parity calculation process. It is recommended that you use an SSD for your VMS. They will perform better that way. Sent from my chisel, carved into granite
  13. Re: 80% improvement in context switching. I run win10 vm's on my Intel 2670 dual cpu server and they seem more laggy recently. Am I one who will really notice the benefits of this plugin? Sent from my chisel, carved into granite
  14. tr0910

    3x4TB Array

    Tools->New Config Will do it for you. But first note all your disks, their serials and where you want them to go. This will allow you to put anything anywhere, so be careful. Sent from my chisel, carved into granite
  15. Hey, great going. I used to do this when I got a few new 4tb drives and my servers were all 3tb or 2tb. My Areca cards would create this kind of virtual parity with a bunch of spare 2tb drives. Worked great for me. You just have to manage your risk and for me, I went dual parity at the same time, so the risk was minimal. I quit using it as the Areca 1280 cards are getting long in the tooth and I got a bunch of 8tb drives all at once for the next upgrade.. But for the initial switch to larger drives it is perfectly fine especially when you will have a boatload of smaller drives sitting there doing nothing. Is this 48 bays in a 4U chassis ala the backblaze design??
  16. Can this be accomplished without a Sophos or Snort internet connection. What about those who have brain dead Comcast, Roadrunner, Verizon etc routers and can't or don't want to replace them. Can this be accomplished completely in unRaid iptables after opening up a bunch of ports on the router?
  17. Thanks for the tips. I wasn't expecting help from the expert, but only if others had tips. It seems that most have continued to use it as you recommended. I will use a VPN to get access securely for now. If the need escalates, I will revisit, thanks.
  18. Seems no one else is wondering about secure ftp??
  19. I have just updated to 6.7 and the latest proFTPd and am wondering about secure ftp configuration. Does anyone have this working? Up until now, only local access was required, there was no need to provide internet access, but now I might need to forward port 21 on my router and I am worried that this isn't secure with the default settings.
  20. Unraid counts attached drives during boot. It doesn't count network ports. Having USB drives attached during boot will cause this. Solution, unplug them at boot time. Sent from my chisel, carved into granite
  21. You mean Open-WRT? What are you trying to do? Sent from my chisel, carved into granite
  22. Note when you list the SAS address, it will be formatted with dashes for easy reading. Do not enter the dashes. Enter it as follows "sas2flash.efi -o -sasadd 5001E67C1B8A0000" Adapter Selected is a LSI SAS: SAS2308_2(D1) Controller Number : 0 Controller : SAS2308_2(D1) PCI Address : 00:05:00:00 SAS Address : 5001E67-C-1B8A-0000 NVDATA Version (Default) : 11.00.00.05 NVDATA Version (Persistent) : 11.00.00.05 Firmware Product ID : 0x2714 (IR) Firmware Version : 17.00.01.00 NVDATA Vendor : LSI NVDATA Product ID : RMS25KB080. BIOS Version : 07.33.00.00 UEFI BSD Version : N/A FCODE Version : N/A Board Name : RMS25KB080. Board Assembly : N/A Board Tracer Number : N/A Finished Processing Commands Successfully. Exiting SAS2Flash.
  23. I always get a full compare both sides but it takes only seconds for 70,000 files between USA and China. How many files are you rsyncing in one go? My experience with rclone is similar if a bit faster since it is USA to Google drive. No China delays. That a look at your rsync command. Do a smaller group of files to test. It may just be a typo... Sent from my chisel, carved into granite
  24. Yes it is script related and yes it will move files reliably internationally, but rsync is more like backup or copy than sync. You can copy both ways and remove deleted files, but you are not likely to be happy with the result. Now if you can live with a static file structure with no file deletes renames or file moves, you might be satisfied. If all file creation and file modification happens at one Central location, even better. But Dropbox is much better at true bidirectional syncing. Also check out rclone with Google drive or Amazon cloud storage. Sent from my chisel, carved into granite
  25. I have never had this issue as defined by @strike as I do most of my backups by disk. rsync mainserver.mnt/disk1 -> backupserver.mnt/disk1 If you can do it this way, you won't have the problems he listed. However if you want to backup mnt/user/everything -> mnt/user/everything and expect rsync to manage everything for you, it won't be so easy.