JonathanM

it's at the top of every page in this topic.

https://github.com/Tzahi12345/YoutubeDL-Material/wiki/Firefox-Extension I'd recommend browsing around their github, and use the issues section for suggestions and support.

Why not send a read request to a file on the disks in question at the same point in the script that you are trying to use the http spinup?

If you neglect to stop the services, mover won't touch open files, so you could end up with remnants. Safest way is to disable the docker and vm services when you are doing massive reconfigurations like that. Also, on the shares page, the compute buttons will show you how the data is distributed across your devices so you can make good decisions on what settings to change to get things moved where you want.

Shut down your server until you sort out your firewall. You must not expose Unraid directly to the internet, you must have an external firewall in place.

Make sure windows isn't "helping" you by using previous memorized credentials.

Forcing it may not work as intended, be sure to check with iperf.

Maybe try passing through a different chipset USB card? I'm just shooting in the dark here.

If you enable the search github option in community applications settings there are a bunch of results for powershell containers. Possibly try that?

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Device_file

If you do that, your old flash drive will no longer work, the license will be moved to the new drive. The files you need to transfer all in the config folder, so keep a backup of that folder. The easiest way is to click on the flash drive on the main GUI page and download the backup from that page.

yeah, don't do that. Unraid isn't really designed with hot swap in mind. You can get away with it in some cases, but in general it's not even considered as a thing that may happen. When a drive disappears while powered up, the first reaction is that it failed, not assume it was done on purpose. Granted, this plugin shouldn't continue to write to a missing device, but I understand why it did.

Do you have 2 SSID's showing when you browse for WiFi access points? My first guess is that you are connected to a wifi set up as a guest network.

No, completely the opposite, I expect the regular user to not be able to do most of what I outlined. I'm not saying the easy button feature isn't needed, I'm pointing out that a linux savvy programmer COULD give us a plugin to handle it, but that fact that none have is evidence that if it's going to happen, it's probably going to have to wait in line with the myriad of other features that users are asking limetech itself to integrate. Hopefully the recent paid staff additions will accelerate the implementation of these many wanted features, but I'm not holding my breath. A great many (almost all?) of the features currently being added to the core of unraid started life as user created add ons, and have been slowly incorporated. The fact that nobody has stepped up and written a community supported plugin to do this specific function says something. I was simply pointing out what obstacles are there for a community member to set this up. Doesn't mean it won't eventually happen. Who knows, maybe limetech has this all lined up for the next major beta after the 6.9 series. I've also left out some major issues that would have to be addressed with a slot removal function, namely the difficulties posed by the very thing that makes unraid different. Each drive slot is an independent file system, and can be referenced with individual specificity if desired. That means that if you remove a slot and there are still file paths configured to write to it directly, bad things will happen. There are so many different places that could be done, it's difficult to cover your bases, as simply moving the files to a different path doesn't mean the application that wrote them there will be able to find them at the new location. If everyone was forced to use fuse /mnt/user paths, there would be less of an issue, but that's not how things are right now. /mnt/diskX is a perfectly valid path to save and retrieve files, and some people use direct paths for practically everything for speed and organizational reasons. Also, the /mnt/user shares have include and exclude rules that reference the disk slots, you have to reconcile what happens when one of those slots is gone, and how to allocate the data that is to be moved from the slot to be vacated. It's not as cut and dried as it seems.

Have you tried a different USB controller? Sometimes hardware does fail.

Please use the existing container support thread.

Cool! I figured since slack has so little in common with ubuntu for some things that the script wouldn't work OOTB.

That's what I'm running on my VM, I've never even tried to set that up in unraid. I ASSumed since it wanted to install using a script with sudo it would be a royal pain to get running natively in unraid. Are you saying I can just grab the binary it built on my ubuntu box and run it in unraid?

I've had the same initial reaction to version numbers, it's not just you. 🤣 I blame microsoft, who clearly did not start a good precedent by moving from windows 3.1 to 3.11, then releasing 3.2 afterwards. 11 is larger than 2, but was a prior release. microsoft ftw!

30 is clearly a much larger number than 8 or 16. I suppose the larger number means later, but who knows nowadays.

I'm not aware of one, my workaround is to have a UrBackup client in a VM that has my critical shares mapped. It's a little convoluted, but it seems to work ok.

There are already procedures in place to accomplish all this. You can use Unbalance to move the data, then dd zeros to the drive slot, then set a new config and remove the drive, and start the array with the parity is valid checkbox checked. The issue is that people don't want to do all that manually, they want a big red "EASY" button. Note, this would not be fast, nor risk free. There is no shortcutting the huge amount of data writes that have to happen to accomplish this. Anyone who writes an all in one script would need to put in MASSIVE effort to make the procedure as safe and idiot proof as possible, and still end up with a support headache from people complaining about how long the procedure takes. It's a lot of effort for almost zero reward.

This is the issue, as the parity check was due to unclean shutdown.

Only for OCD. Unraid is perfectly happy to run with parity2 and no parity1. You have the same level as protection as having just parity1 assigned. The downsides besides the OCD of having parity1 empty is that parity2 is not data slot position agnostic like parity1, and parity2 takes a bit more CPU power to compute. So, you very well could have completed your move as planned, as long as you would be content with an empty parity1 slot and an occupied parity2. Nothing wrong there, just not as tidy visually.