jonp

I don't think this is possible today, but this is an interesting idea. Btrfs offers a way to set quotas on subvolumes, which would be one way to accomplish this at a filesystem level, but not sure if that's ideal for user shares because shares can cross over multiple devices / filesystems. This is definitely a feature that we should look into at some point, but not something I would think needs to be prioritized for 6.0.

Well done arch. This is pretty much how I did it. You can play with xhci and ehci handoff settings in your bios as well to get multiple USB controllers accessible from onboard chip set.

That is correct!

So with respect to unRAID OS, Docker, and your VMs sharing system resources, the reality is that unRAID OS is very non-intensive on the CPU. Even when copying large bulks of data across various network protocols, the OS remains fairly light on CPU resource needs. That said, plugins can definitely drive this up especially ones like media servers which perform transcoding on the host. That is another reason why we also recommend the use of Docker containers over plugins for these types of needs, because they can be better controlled and managed in how they allocate resources. That said, unRAID itself is not bound to any specific cores by default, and will allocate resources as it sees fit for it's system tasks. unRAID OS takes precedent over all other system services as it is responsible for protecting that which matters most: your data. To go a step further, you also should consider your CPU and your workloads. For example, let's say I want to have two instances of OpenELEC. I can actually create OpenELEC twice with both instances given two cores (and the same cores at that), or I could give each instance one core a piece (different cores). Now on my system, in testing, I didn't notice a difference either way, but to be fair, OpenELEC uses very little CPU as it is, even when playing content (since there isn't any transcoding). My primary example for doing this would be for running localized Windows Virtual Desktops. If you're running Windows 8.1 with a GPU passed through along with a set of input devices (Mouse / Keyboard), and you're watching youtube, and your cores are shared with Plex while it's transcoding a stream of video to another machine, your youtube video will stutter, the audio will crackle, and in general, you will feel it is an awful user experience. But when you pin 6 vCPUs 0-5 to Windows and use cpuset to force Plex to only operate in cores 6-7, you will get great performance for the gaming VM and great performance for transcoding. In a test today, we had the following: - booted OpenELEC, and had it pinned to cores 6-7. (AMD HD 4350 GPU, Onboard Analog Audio [00:1b.00], USB M Only, Dell Monitor) - booted Windows 8.1 and it had pinned to cores 0-5 (nVIDIA GTX 780 Videos & Audio, USB M/K, Gsync 4k Monitor) - bound Needo's Plex Media Server to cores to 6-7 - Started looping transcoding through a browser on my macbook air - Started looping transcoding through a browser on Eric's macbook pro - Started playing XBMC movie trailers on the OpenELEC VM - Started playing Titanfall in 1440P resolution on Windows 8.1 (pretty cranked settings too). - Smiles on our faces...priceless... I kid you not, this work flawlessly and using HTOP we monitored the CPU and verified the core pinnings were working. Frankly, we could have probably gotten even more transcoding going on if we wanted. The key here was not in the amount of vCPUs assigned to the other VMs, it was the pinning of the cores to keep context switching to a minimum and restricted and isolated to the VM.

And yes your setup looks good to me!

"Need" being the important word here. I do not need a Win8 VM, but for the cost of a gpu I can have a badass gaming pc more poweful than my ps4 inside my server. I do not need an XBMCubuntu VM, but because I have one now, I no longer require a separate HTPC , so I can retire it. I'm sure most people will be happy with docker, but the more I'm messing around with VM's the happier I am that they are being integrated. Not to mention its cool as funk being able to tell ppl whats running on my PC when they ask I love the idea of having One-PC-To-Rule-Them-All Horse for courses though Manticore pretty much summed it up. We are working on materials to make our mission easier to understand. There are still a lot of really cool and useful things that VMS can do that containers cannot.

UPDATE 4/27/2015: --cpuset will be deprecated in Docker 1.6. For those using unRAID 6 beta 15, you are not affected, but when we upgrade to Docker 1.6, this will be impacted. The new method will be to use --cpuset-cpus (it's just being renamed). Hey guys, wanted to share something cool we figured out today that can substantially impact how Docker and VMs work together on the same host. In short, you can force individual containers to be bound to specific CPU cores inside unRAID. Why is this useful? The number one thing that can affect user experience for VMs running on an unRAID host that are localized is context switching. When applications are competing for access to the CPU, they essentially take turns and when that happens, the processor performs a context switch where it unloads data from within the processors L1, L2, and L3 cache back into RAM temporarily so that the other process can load into that cache quickly to perform it's job, then unload and reload the first process. While this is a normal thing to occur, it can cause some undesirable effects when severely processor intensive activities are happening in both a container and a VM at the same time. By pinning specific containers to specific cores, similar to how we can with virtual machines, we can completely eliminate the need for context switching to occur and as a result, avoid undesirable impacts to user experience. How to do it The plan is to implement this into dockerMan in an upcoming release as an advanced configuration option that you can choose to apply to all docker containers or individual containers, but for now, you can take advantage of this TODAY by modifying your existing containers in dockerMan like so: In the "repository name" field, simply add the following code before the name of the author/repo: --cpuset=# If you want to set multiple cores, you can do so by using commas or to specify a range of cores, you can use a dash. Examples: --cpuset=0,2,4,6 --cpuset=0-3 Note that cores are numbered starting with 0. Also note that you can check the # of cores you have in total on your system by typing the following in a command line session (SSH or Telnet): nproc

Just an FYI, this is definitely something we need to solve, but there are other bigger fish to fry in development first.

Category has been deprecated. No need to use anymore.

Yeah, I think there is more to it than that.

This is possible, but we have to pass additional attributes to indicate the specific flirc by device id. I'll test this out today and see if I can get you some XML to try out.

Since making this post, you guys have had a lot on your plate (especially w/ the reiserFS corruption issue, etc), just wondering if there is any other data I can provide relevant to enable this feature. I found some "guides" to get the shadow copy volumes setup on a linux server: http://www.linuxtopia.org/online_books/network_administration_guides/samba_reference_guide/30_VFS_13.html Here is some actual documentation on the samba module: https://www.samba.org/samba/docs/man/manpages/vfs_shadow_copy2.8.html I would be happy to seek out more information, but again, I am unaware of the technical challenges of such an implementation. Thanks, Ogi Ogi, thanks for your patience with us. I want to explore this further but we are about to go on a feature freeze for 6.0. Need to clamp down what we have first before we can add any more. That said, this sounds like something we for sure would want to look into for our windows users.

this is working as intended per crashplans instructions. if you want to use the UI without ssh you need to modifiy my.service.xml in your appdata\crashplan\conf change it from 127.0.0.1 to 0.0.0.0 <serviceUIConfig> <serviceHost>127.0.0.1</serviceHost> <servicePort>4243</servicePort> <connectCheck>0</connectCheck> This is why I love this community and these forums. You guys continually assist me in my own education. I was just wondering the other day how to get around the ssh and putty requirement for managing this and your post here seems to be the ticket. Thanks for sharing your wisdom!!

I get same problem. How do we set up a config file? All I want to do is access another unRAID server and vice versa. Please, need more info, is it server or client? what UnRAID version? anyway, both the 2 plugins install on a fresh system perfect (Beta 10 on a VM) Syslog ? Thanks //Peter I've been running this in both beta 10 and 10a (client, not server) and it has consistently worked flawlessly for me. I actually haven't had to touch OpenVPN in over a year because its so rock solid. Peter is the man!!!

Are you hinting that we will be seeing this soon, or just trying to make us jealous? Working on it ;-)

Peter, You are awesome as normal. Looking forward to testing this out tonight with beta 10!!

OK this one is really stumping me... Now I know that this worked on your previous board, but can you plug the stick into your pc and run make_bootable.bat again and if on windows, make sure to run it as an administrator? Just want to sanity check this. Also, do other USB boot devices work?

Awesome. On a plane back to Chicago today, so might not see your pics till the weekend.

I'm not doubting the viability of the flash drive, just the bios may be different in how to properly get it to boot. I know this is somewhat confusing which is why I initially didn't try to explain. Pics of bios will make this easier to diagnose.

Mainly your boot priority and what in particular I'm wondering is if your BIOS identifies the flash device twice (once "vanilla" and the other as a UEFI boot device). I haven't been able to get unRAID to boot off USB if I specify the entry with the UEFI option.

Can you take a pic or a few of your BIOS page and upload here for us to see? I want to see how it shows the flash device in the BIOS.

So is this like file by file time capsule service for Windows?

Will be in talks with peter on this. I think we would like to incorporate both server and client plugins in unRAID 6.

Chuck, This is just about the coolest idea I've seen in a long time. What a creative way to hide your storage. I am beyond impressed. This needs to be featured in a blog post on our website. Would you mind if I linked these photos? Do you have any more to share? This is amazing!!

Note: Tom prioritized this for us to accomplish for you in 6.0. I also modified the subject line to help clarify what this post is about for those not familiar with the compliance section ;-)