JonathanM

Actually I was thinking of upgrading the current drives one at a time, so the content would stay mostly on the same drives, and the removed drives would be a full backup. You would need to remove the second parity drive to allow 6TB data drives. After all the 6TB drives were installed, then you could copy the content of the last couple 4TB drives to the 6TB ones.

Can you upgrade the drives to the new ones in the current server then move them over? That would simplify things.

If I were you I'd let it bake some more, probably get better options that way.

Ah, you said S02, so that's what I searched. How many total have you scraped? I'm almost 4,000K You can search with the string I posted to see if that's what you already tried. Try 3aa2514dffbff1e65dda107914a51557dd2f7326 for 03

https://www.amd.com/en/products/processors/desktops/ryzen/7000-series/amd-ryzen-9-7950x3d.html Max Memory Speed 2x1R DDR5-5200 2x2R DDR5-5200 4x1R DDR5-3600 4x2R DDR5-3600

What speeds are you running? With 4 sticks the processor is only rated for 3600, regardless of the rated memory speed.

Is this what you got? 91e1975f6df6e48542f4921f045a6854621f1bc8

Since there is a community supported plugin for customizing parity checks, take a look through the support thread and see if you can accomplish what you want already, if not, ask to see if it can be added there.

Running Unraid as a guest is not officially supported. It's not forbidden, but any issues you encounter will need to be sorted out by collaboration with other like minded users, if you feel there is an issue with Unraid you will be asked to recreate that issue running baremetal before Limetech will look at it. With that in mind, I moved your post to the specific area on these forums where running Unraid as a guest is discussed. Hopefully someone familiar with your questions can help you out, and you can browse around to see what others have dealt with.

You should have waited. You are now rebuilding the unmountable image from parity overwriting the data on that disk that was mounted successfully as an unassigned device.

Only thing I see is before you run the mover, all services that access files on the pool need to be shut down. Typically that means disabling both the docker and VM services, not just stopping the containers or guest OS's.

No, single mode aggregates the space of the drives, interleaving writes where possible for speed. You need RAID1, where the drives are duplicated, so you can then remove 1 and still have your data.

Currently the primary use of preclear is to stress test the drive. Many, many, many years ago when preclear was authored, adding a drive to the array kept you from fully starting and accessing the rest of the array until the clear operation was done. This was a total pain, meant that adding a drive kept you offline from all your data for potentially days. That was the reason for preclear, which was command line only. Now, adding a drive allows you to use the system normally for the entire process, and the new drive is available to format after the clear is done. This plugin can work to accelerate that, and allow formatting to be done almost immediately, but it's very sensitive, any writes to the cleared drive before it's added to the array will invalidate the preclear status, forcing the normal clear process to happen. So, yes, if something writes to the drive after the preclear is done before it's added to the array, the preclear time is "wasted", but the statistics about drive performance and any errors happen before you commit to putting the drive in the array, which means you should find out if the drive has issues before you put the rest of your data at risk by adding a failing drive to the array. I'd say that information is still valuable, regardless of whether you still have to wait several hours to format the drive.

Pretty sure you just need to specify an exclusion for that path. It's out of the ordinary for the normal way of doing things, so it trips up the defaults in the backup plugin. It does not ever need to be backed up, it's simply a way for multiple separate binhex containers to share information.

I don't know the exact details, but some of the major things are a single partition starting at a specific offset, I think 64 or 2048, something like that. Yep. It's a standard linux layout, just more particular to accommodate the parity system.

Unraid uses standard linux, but it's a little more specific. So a disk formatted in linux CAN be made compatible with Unraid, but a disk formatted in Unraid should be readable in linux by default.

Is the card actively cooled?

Yep.

What about the SATA data cable?

Why not boot from your Unraid key, and format the drive there using Unassigned Devices? As long as you don't mess with array assignments or accidentally format your Linux boot disk it should work fine. I'd make a backup of the config folder on the key before doing this, just in case, plus it never hurts to have a current backup of your config.

Having both on the same port is valid.

I would suspect cabling or connection errors. Power stability can also cause that sort of thing, a PSU may get weaker as it ages without fully failing. SATA power splitters are also a common problem.

Delete and recreate those two port entries, but with 55001 on both host and container.

-p '55001:100/tcp' -p '55001:000/udp' Those are wrong. They should look more like this -p '8080:8080/tcp' with the same numbers on both sides. If you select advanced mode on the template you should be able to find and correct them.

The docker run command would contain what's needed to check. canyouseeme is good for non-vpn connections.