[6.6.1 Crashes]

Just thought I'd update this thread. It is three days now without a problem so 'fingers crossed' I guess we should attribute this failure to the Realtek drivers in the latest releases. I can't honestly say the problem is solved because I've got around it by adding a replacement Ethernet card. I would also add that the Plex issue has also gone away.

 

Just in case this is tripping anyone else up it manifests itself as either a reset of the the Plex client application (on my Samsung TV) or a network error stopping the media playing. No amount of changing the source of the material or how it was presented to the client fixed the issue.

 

Now 1/11/2018 and no further failures. So the Realtek problem is I guess not fixed in 6.6.3 (at least for me)

[6.6.1 Crashes]

I don't think we've proved the network card as the culprit yet have we?  However, coincidentally my Plex problem has gone away and that did look like a network issue! Let's give it a couple more days.

 

I hear what you say about Realtek but they are very common chips on Asus boards. I agree that fixing a Hackintosh problem which also runs on an Asus board did take a very long time!!

[6.6.1 Crashes]

So here is an update. I upgraded the BIOS but it made no difference as far as I can tell. I still got a crash. (I can not say that all these crashes are identical but the symptoms are). So I have now added an Intel PCI network card as the main network interface and I guess the other interface is at least not being used.  I am running 6.6.3 so I now need to wait and see. 48 hours was about the limit previously so we're at 7hrs and counting.

[6.6.1 Crashes]

Second crash as before. Diagnostics attached. I have reverted to 6.5.3 meantime to check that this is still functioning reliably. I have a network card somewhere that may not be Realtek and I will put this into the server. How would I disable the Realtek card or do I just not connect ethernet to it?

media-diagnostics-20181023-1036.zip

[6.6.1 Crashes]

I'll bear that in mind but without any evidence that this would fix something that a roll-back wouldn't do I prefer the rollback?

 

I have these errors in my log:

Oct 20 19:26:39 Media nginx: 2018/10/20 19:26:39 [error] 13954#13954: *10747 readv() failed (104: Connection reset by peer) while reading upstream, client: 192.168.1.11, server: , request: "POST /webGui/include/DashUpdate.php HTTP/1.1", upstream: "fastcgi://unix:/var/run/php5-fpm.sock:", host: "192.168.1.103", referrer: "http://192.168.1.103/Dashboard"
Oct 20 20:22:44 Media nginx: 2018/10/20 20:22:44 [error] 13954#13954: *20244 readv() failed (104: Connection reset by peer) while reading upstream, client: 192.168.1.11, server: , request: "POST /webGui/include/Notify.php HTTP/1.1", upstream: "fastcgi://unix:/var/run/php5-fpm.sock:", host: "192.168.1.103", referrer: "http://192.168.1.103/Dashboard"

 

192.168.1.11 is my iMac usually displaying the unRaid Dashbooard in Firefox whilst 103 is the server.  Any ideas?

 

As for now I'll leave the server on 6.6.2 unless crashes become more frequent. I could with some effort move my drives across to a spare system with a completely different motherboard. But that is a can of new worms too!

[6.6.1 Crashes]

[6.2.2] Crashed (i.e. nor User acess via web interface and all server connections dropped)

 

I have attached the diagnostics file but this is only since restart? At this point it seems identical to previous faills but I was moving a 12Gb file at the time!

media-diagnostics-20181020-1824.zip

[6.6.1 Crashes]

I only brought up Microsoft because of their deceptive practises. In all respects I would hope you strive to be better. I still think you have two products that should separate as that would reduce the update frequency but they could both be built on the same foundation. IMHO Fileservers should be sound and stable (as should a Docker Host) but the world of Dockers is rapidly changing and new developments such as Portainer and the like are creating a different support and management world. As well as an eager User community.

 

OK you 'browbeat' me into trying 6.6.2 and all I can say is 'alls well' after 1 day 13 hours. But that is all I can tell you. And if rolling back hadn't resurrected a problem for me with Plex I would have left things alone.

[6.6.1 Crashes]

So yet again you justify releasing a product full of 'known issues' with no known fix. Where is the list of fixes from the previous release? Where is the list of known issues except in a long list of other 'bug reports'. Does 'Solved' mean fixed in 6.6.2? Why isn't there a category 'acknowledged'?

 

I just don't get it. How would I have known about the several Realtek fixes? Are they expected to to fix the problem that was a major issue? Have they fixed it? Only when the answers are forthcoming would you expect users to enter the realm of try it, as only with the right information would I risk another failure. Indeed what should I test to prove the fix works for me?

[6.6.1 Crashes]

So I see that a new relaease has *hit the fan and there are *NO* warnings about known problems. Sorry guys I just don't get this mentality of leading users onto broken systems. It just looks like a 'Microsoft' trick? Am I the only one that has been burned? If there are other people that agree with my view could I get some support and only then things might get better!

[6.6.1 Crashes]

1 hour ago, bonienl said:

Honestly spoken, even with a dozen 'alarm' bells, people don't read release notes and upgrade no matter what, just to complain afterwards.

Agreed and such is life but where important systems are concerned neither the supplier nor the client can afford to ignore valuable information. Does this mean we will see warnings now and in future 'cos I'd like to see a positive outcome?

[6.6.1 Crashes]

So by inference, if I had a standard hardware build that was just a server I would not have had a problem. Additionally, *IF*, once these issues were flagged there had been a warning and advice then I would not have had a problem either. I am not at issue with the fault itself, just the methods used to mitigate what happens once a problem is acknowledged as well as making suggestions as to how users might be better served (no pun intended).

 

As I have said I believe a file server is such a key functionality that the advice should be not to compromise it with dubious or indeed any addons and I would remove my only remaining Plex Docker if I did not think it at least was ubiquitous enough to deserve some limited support.

[6.6.1 Crashes]

I specifically wasn't proposing that anything not on the list would not be supported. What I would like like to see are builds that can be tried and tested and thereby (hopefully) offering customers a better chance of surviving an upgrade. IMHO it is currently a lottery as to whether an upgrade will go smoothly or not and despite the RC system there is no record (there being too many variations) of what does and doesn't work. Or any records of what might have been actually tested!

 

I would not wish to prevent users from deploying what they will (I run a Hackintosh which I rarely upgrade and an iMac that is on Mojave) but I believe there are benefits from tested, optimised solutions.

 

Perhaps if there was more information about the pros and cons of the new releases we might be better informed? More imprtantly, there is (as far as I can see) still no warning in the update announcement. I can not forgive people who won't admit an error (the error being a failing to post a warning!!!)

[6.6.1 Crashes]

I did some thinking about bonienl' comment and Limetech isn't Apple or Microsoft and I do hope they listen.

 

We all know that the history of Unraid is many user built servers, all different and some vintage examples. Perhaps it is time to define some Limetech recommended builds that would be tested and supported. A deal could be done with either a manufacturer or supplier to offer packaged deals (built or not) and such builds would be tried and tested. The product itself could also have two distinct streams Docker or Storage. Personally I wouldn't compromise a data server with Dockers and I have removed most of mine to the Raspberry world and there I try to keep apps to their own Pi or quarantine dodgy ones. In an ideal environment perhaps a data server without Docker and a Docker server which also acts as a data backup could be a way to go?

 

I have two data servers one for backup and the majority of my storage is Media and not critical as there are copies elsewhere. I would certainly upgrade one of my servers for a supported build.

 

Perhaps Limetech would consider asking their customers for input which could define how many builds are necessary  Perhaps alignment with the existing licencing is enough?

[6.6.1 Crashes]

I hear what you both say and I understand that we are dealing with a complex product.

 

I do not see a warning in the 6.6.1 announcement that there are any problems to be aware of and yes I do have a Realtek 03:00.0 Ethernet controller: Realtek Semiconductor Co., Ltd. RTL8111/8168/8411 PCI Express Gigabit Ethernet Controller (rev 09). If I had seen that warning I would not have upgraded.

 

I worry when we quote 'bleeding edge' because your product is too mature to consider such risks IMHO. You have a large established user base that pays money for quality AND maturity.

 

So please instigate a warning and remove it when the issue is resolved.

 

Finally crash is crash for me non-responsive, dead and useless. If I were running a mission critical system I would not upgrade without my own testing but I am not, so I try to stay a bit behind 'bleeding edge'. However, without clear warnings of known problems I am blind to the consequences. 6.6.1 is not a major release? So it should not have major isssues.