Dougy

I too was skeptical thinking it was a bad move to predict a release - we have seen that before. But Gary may be right... the problem is not that the date might come and final is not ready and not released.... it is that the date will come and that it it will be released despite the fact that it may not be ready simply because this is required to profit from the sale of the new hardware.... months ago a pole was taken as to whether 5 should be released final as is or if we should wait until the last of the problems are fixed. We never really got an answer to what the outcome was but considering we have waited and waited and waited for the occasional RC to be released since then, I think it's fair to say that the decision was that 5 should not be released as final until the problems are resolved.... now months later with most of the problems still existing we are being told the date of the next RC and also 5 final....... So after all that waiting, working on solving the problems is being abandoned and another feature is being thrown in it is going to be released as 5 final just so servers can be sold with 5 final........ am I the only one that is a little bit angry?

it could also be used to increase the speed of the cache. Once faster network cards become common this might be useful.

If RC13 is being released latter this week then how can you possibly know that 5.0 final will be released the week of June 3? The reason that a RC is released is so that it can be tested for faults. How can we possibly know what faults will be reported in RC13 and that it will be able to rectify them by the week of June 3?

Hi Tom#2 I'm sure that we are all hoping that you will not also ignore the majority of the posts seeking clarification. What light can you shed on the main web page advertising servers with V5 that have features that do not exist in V5? Can you confirm if the intention is to add more features to V5 before it goes final?

the rebuild finished successfully. The random files I have accessed on drive 1 and 6 appear to be intact. Currently 30% into a parity check with no errors. Thank you very much for your assistance Gary & Joe. last thing I will try is to preclear the original disc 1 that failed with sectors pending relocation, just in case these were caused by the power issues and decided to go away... failing that I will ship it of monday for warranty.

Still waking up at 5am when I made the purchase, accidentally bought the non-modular model instead, sames specs otherwise. Installed this afternoon and appears to be running stable. currently 45% into a rebuild of disc 6 with no signs of trouble. fingers crossed that the data on disc 1 and 6 will be sound after all the issues I had earlier...

thanks heaps for all the feedback guys. At the time I purchased my current power supply it was published as being a single rail 30amp 12v. Now when I search the web there does seem to be some confusion as to whether it is single rail or dual rail. either way it does look like I have been pushing it's limits and the problems possible began when I added the last drive...... I have just placed an order for a Corsair TX-650M Modular Power Supply http://www.pccasegear.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=15_354&products_id=18539 fingers crossed it will be here for the weekend. any speculation on what the outcome will be for poor old disc 6?

its been a while since I researched PSU's but I do recall that a single 12v rail was important. Is this psu a good replacement http://www.pccasegear.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=15_354&products_id=21713

as for the power supply, I have a Seasonic S12II 430W. I am currently running 10 WD green discs with an atom board + controller card. This might sound like small power supply but according to the power supply thread it should have no problem powering this hardware and I chose it so that it would still be efficient when idling. If there is a power problem then I would suspect the sata power splitters........ I really have no idea how to proceed

prior to my current problems since I upgraded to RC12a, I was running RC4 with special features. Sometimes the server was becoming unresponsive and I had to reboot it. This began every few weeks and at the end up to a couple of times a day which led to me upgrading. could me restarting the server have resulted in the power off retract count?

it seems I have bigger problems. I purchased a new 3tb hd to replace the failed 2tb drive. After a successful preclear I rebuilt the drive. Things seemed fine right up until the drive finished rebuilding and then all of a sudden drive 6 showed errors and was red balled. I have no idea if this means the rebuild would have been full of errors? An initial smart report resulted in the following: Smartctl: Device Read Identity Failed (not an ATA/ATAPI device) A mandatory SMART command failed: exiting. To continue, add one or more '-T permissive' options. It seems that the drive had gone 'offline'. After a reboot a smart report results in: SMART Attributes Data Structure revision number: 16 Vendor Specific SMART Attributes with Thresholds: ID# ATTRIBUTE_NAME FLAG VALUE WORST THRESH TYPE UPDATED WHEN_FAILED RAW_VALUE 1 Raw_Read_Error_Rate 0x002f 200 200 051 Pre-fail Always - 3 3 Spin_Up_Time 0x0027 205 165 021 Pre-fail Always - 4733 4 Start_Stop_Count 0x0032 099 099 000 Old_age Always - 1851 5 Reallocated_Sector_Ct 0x0033 200 200 140 Pre-fail Always - 0 7 Seek_Error_Rate 0x002e 200 200 000 Old_age Always - 0 9 Power_On_Hours 0x0032 078 078 000 Old_age Always - 16655 10 Spin_Retry_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 0 11 Calibration_Retry_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 0 12 Power_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 130 192 Power-Off_Retract_Count 0x0032 200 200 000 Old_age Always - 93 193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 179 179 000 Old_age Always - 63201 194 Temperature_Celsius 0x0022 124 105 000 Old_age Always - 26 196 Reallocated_Event_Count 0x0032 200 200 000 Old_age Always - 0 197 Current_Pending_Sector 0x0032 200 200 000 Old_age Always - 0 198 Offline_Uncorrectable 0x0030 200 200 000 Old_age Offline - 0 199 UDMA_CRC_Error_Count 0x0032 200 200 000 Old_age Always - 0 200 Multi_Zone_Error_Rate 0x0008 200 200 000 Old_age Offline - 9 no sectors pending but I have never seen multi zone error rate errors before... what do they mean? I reseated the cables and then unassigned the disc and then reboot and began a rebuild but almost straight away it red balled again and gone offline again....... This is getting really frustrating, going on a week and I still can't use my server Thanks for all your help so far, but really need some more!

OK so it's starting to look like a straight forward disc failure.... just I still don't understand why disc1 didn't red ball when the errors began. The current pending sectors are recent as I had looked at smart reports not to long ago and no discs had pending sectors. The power off retract count does look high but this is one of my oldest drives and as well as power outages this wouldn't be the first time I have had issues with loose cables. As for the parity check, I did not change any options. Are you saying that by default the parity check does not wright corrections to the parity drive? If not that is good news and hopefully my data is still all intact.

here is the smart report. I'm thinking maybe I bumped a cable when removing the thumb drive..... I don't understand why the drive didn't redball during the parity check... but if I am currently running under emulation for disk 1 then that means that the parity is still correct even though I was getting errors for disk 1 and there appeared to be wrights to the parity during the parity check........ smart.txt

things keep getting weirder.... after a restart disk 1 is redballed...... but I am able to restart the array and access the files on disk 1. I have attached the current syslog as it is smaller...... so...... is the parity still valid and disc 1 is being emulated? I don't remember how to run smart report without simple features... can somebody give me step by step instructions.... sorry syslog2.txt

it zips down to 600kb with max rar compression. still too large to attach here. wow..... the parity check finished with 470258525 errors on disc 1....... but now the files are back!!!!!!!!!!!! can anyone explain what happened?

yep that is the case I'm not sure how to share the syslog as it is really big... probably because of all the errors...... This looks bad really hoping Joe can help

thanks for your reply. yes, parity was valid before the upgrade and all the other discs have 0 errors. currently the disk 1 share shows no files on the disk.... so I can't backup the data.... what I don't understand is why the disk hasn't red balled if its a lose cable etc...... I will power down and try reseating the cables after the parity check finishes. I will need to wait for a Linux guru to chime in as I have little experience....

just checked the server and found these errors at the command prompt.... doesn't look good

I was previously running rc4 but had been having problems with the server dropping of the network every so often and needing to be restarted. This became more frequent so I ran a memory test overnight. This did not reveal any problems so I decided to upgrade to rc12a. I previously has some plugins installed and did not remember the exact details so decided to start with a fresh install. This all seemed to run fine, I assigned the disks as they had been this morning and all looked good so I started I brought it online and started a parity check. I just got home from work and released that one share that spans several disks including disk 1 is missing. When I open the share for disk 1 it shows no files! The parity check is at 87% and shows 470258523 errors for disk 1!!! Please help, is there anyway I can recover the contents of disk 1? the syslog is 35mb as a txt file and zips down to 635kb. what is the best way to share it?

no one said it wasn't a good idea. what is not a good idea is to add new features to a RC. Technically it means that it is not an RC but still a beta. so do the maths, this is not RC12a b or c, it is something like beta 30. I think the goal should be to reduce the number of betas, not increase them

I think Tom has made it pretty clear that he's not a PR kinda guy. he would rather ignore all this debate and then chime in with a smart a** response to something else down the track.... remove all the content that doesn't belong in this thread and it's pretty clear that more effort has been spent on upgrading the hardware sales then updating the software....

even if it is premature PR, it seems pretty obvious were the focus is at the moment...... It looks a lot like a really cool case has been sourced that a good profit can be made from, but the case is going to need this new feature before it is viable..... I'm all for Limetech making profits from sales of hardware... but finalizing 5 needs to be the main priority.... I mean come on, some times new versions of betas or RC's are released with no testing at all and then need to be replaced with an a or b version to fix something that a small amount of testing would have avoided. I think I speak for most people here when I say that we are happy to provide the testing for you to save your time and speed the project along, provided you invest that time we save you into finalizing 5 and not how to maximize profits though a different market!

pre order available may 8th... which is now.... It doesn't say when it will be available.... pay now and receive when 5.1 is released?? If the plan is to introduce this feature to the endless RC's then I think there will be a lot of pissed of people who have already purchased the software and are waiting for 5 to go final.....

wow... I saw this this morning at 5am before work. Monday morning I was still waking up... that was freaky..... I found what the song was: anyone know what the film clip with the clown was? or the name of the hacking group?

He never said he only had one board.... you are all amusing it is board listed in his signature, which it may well be.... but perhaps we should confirm this before getting carried away...