steve1977

Thanks again guys. it’s working very well. two more questions: 1) would i benefit significantly from adding a dedicated cache disk for caching? 2) i still have permission issues caused by radarr. i can fix them, but need to find a way that radarr doesn’t cause them again and again. any thoughts? i’ve tried to set to 0777 for file permission in radarr settings, but this didn’t fix it. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

true true. to be precise, letsencrypt is the one listening on port 80/443. so, i need to open the ports for letsencrypt. for different reasons, i prefer not to run letsencrypt on 81/444. with unraid beta, i can now set it to 80/443 and give it its own IP.

i’d still need to set each docker to a different IP? otherwise, i couldn’t have nextcloud listening to 80?

thanks. i run a router vpn, so everything runs over vpn unless i exclude the ip. let me describe what i want to do: * sanzbd docker (want to exclude from vpn, but maybe remote access as web server) * nextcloud docker (need to forward port 80/443 to get this running) * in the future i may want to add deluge docker i have a reasonably modern asus router. is it possible to achieve?

Unfortunately, I don't have an answer to your questions. I am curious though how you mine in your WIN10 VM and how much you get out of it? Did you follow some guide or give me some pointers?

I am running 6.4.0rc14. I would also love to assign a dedicated IP to one of the dockers? Possible and if so, how?

I keep on playing around, but still not successful. Have followed the guide. When accessing the GUI, I receive the following error message. Please see below as well as detailed additional info on pastebin. Much appreciate your help! Caught exception in MusicBrainz::Server::Controller::Root->begin "Replication info missing on a slave server at lib/MusicBrainz/Server/Controller https://pastebin.com/QkaFyZb3

Mmh... How do you access the three GPUs? Do you have screens attached or using some form of remote desktop? Does the issue only happen if you run all three VMs in parallel or also individually? I still face some problems when running two Win VMs in parallel, which I don't face when not passing through the GPU. If I may ask, what are you using three GPUs in paralle for and do you have experience with Gamestream?

Got it, very clear. This is about "display/access", right? So even in this example, the second file would not be "destroyed"? It is "just" not accessible via the user share. I am planning to fully migrate to user shares, so this issue will eventually go away. I now just have the "legacy" situation. Is there some form of command line that will allow me to spot whether I have duplicates across disks?

I have also spent many hours (if not literally days). I still don't have it fully working, but at least made some meaningful improvements. Have you tried to use OVMF instead of Seabios? OVMF appears to work a lot better. Also, are you using RDC, which may be another source of issue?

Thanks for taking the time to reply to my messages. This is very helpful. Everything is working very well for me now. I have set things set as "manual", which very well serves my purpose. I am an intellectually curious person, so have a few more questions how this really works. 1) How does Unraid handle if I happen to have two files in the same folder on two disks that are part of the same user share? For example "movies/myvideo.mkv" on disk 1 and "movies/myvideo.mkv" on disk 2. Would this also lead to corruption? Or over-write? Or somehoe miraculously, the user share would be able to display both movies. In my example, I assume that the two movies are different, but happen to have the same name. 2) I still have not fully understood how the split level works. Let me give an example to illustrate: Disk1/TV/Show1/ (...) Disk2/TV/Show1/ Disk2/TV/Show2/ (...) Disk3/TV/Show3/ (...) I have things set to manual. See my questions below: A) Assuming things are set to manual, adding a movie to user share "/TV/Show1" will never lead to things written to disk3. Even if both disk1 and disk2 are both full. Correct? B) I now go ahead and exclude disk2 from the user share. From what I understand, all of the files in "disk2/TV/Show1" would remain part of the user share and all files are being displayed. When writing to the user share (folder show1), Unraid will always write to disk1/TV/Show1 first independent of all split settings. However, Unraid will over-rule the setting and still write to the excluded disk2 once disk1 is full. I don't understand why it was implemented this way, but doesn't bother me. Just curious whether this is indeed the design principle?

Of course, it is very easy to avoid and @Squid's is correct that odds for it to happen are very low. This assumes though that you set things up and rarely change things. I am using Unraid for the fun of changing things and trying new things out. The tinkering around it is at least as much of the fun as using the actual system. Having the user shares up and running now, I realize how great of a feature this is. Really cool! One thought so, why would Unraid still write to a disk within a user share that has been excluded to be part of the user share. I understand the logic of it still reading it, but don't understand the logic why it should still read to it if no other disk has free.

Thanks. I have it working. Still a bit worried that I turn into corrupting everything, but let me keep fingers crossed that I remember what not to do. @SSD actually nicely laid out nicely the biggest risk scenario: removing a disk from user share and the copying things into the user share. If not done on system level, this will wipe it all.

Thanks. Sparklyballs mentioned three issues though. Do you suspect the closed ports causing the first two issues? Why is 445 "working", but 444 not.

Thanks. What is the difference between "manual" and "split only top-level". I followed your link and not fully clear to me from there.

Thanks guys. I have set it up now. Still struggling though: 1) I have disk shares mapped within my Win10 VM. Can change the folder name on sub-directory. I cannot change the name of the movie (permission issue). Any thoughts what is driving this permission issue? 2) Any thoughts whether "manual" as split-level is actually the best thing for me in stead of top-level? This way, tvshows don't split across disks. 3) Why does Unraid still write to disk1 if I exclude disk1 from the local user share?

And related question. Can I have a disk included in the user share, but not write additional files to it? I want the content of diskX/movies to be part of the user share movies, but I don't want to add additional movies to diskX. Is this what "exclude disk" does? And on related note, I am surprised "include disk" and "exclude disk" both exist? If I exclude one disk, but all disks are included: who "wins"?

Thanks guys. I understand what the issue/"bug" is. I understand it is rare to happen, but knowing me, it is not unlikely... I am about to finish my setup. Are you sure that I should set the split level to "1" (top-level) instead of "manual". "Manual" sounds what I am looking for?

Thanks. I had read through it and tried to follow it. I have no clue what is occupying port 444. I assume from this thread that 443 is taken by Unraid. I can see i the docker settings what other dockers are using, but port 444 is not among them. Is there some other software or plugin for Unraid that can tell me what ports are being used by what? I have signed up for duckdns amd included all respective information (following the how-to). Duckdns is running. Not sure what I am missing within Letsecrypt though?

I know. Just thought to be even more on the safe side. You never know what copy activity is happening and then suddenly all is wiped...

Thanks for your help, this is very helpful. I believe I understand what I'd need to avoid to prevent data loss. To be on the safe side, I may still disable disk shares for now. If I understand you correctly: in case I run out of disk space, it is very easy to just disable user share and then copy & paste between disk shares to free up space. And then enable user shares again. This sounds good and safe enough for me. Let me give it a try.

Got it, thanks. This worries me a bit. I understand there is an easy way to corrupt my files by copying from a disk to a user share. If I read you correctly, I would not corrupt anything if I copy something from a disk to another disk share (even if both are part of a user share)? So, this use case would require me to set "enable disk share" to "yes". I may kill my whole media collection by a wrong copy interaction. Or doing a mistake setting up Sonarr/Radarr correctly? Reading the instruction felt that setting "disk share" to "auto" would be the safest. But from what you say, this would give me the issue of running out of space?

And related question. Assuming I set the "depth" to "1". How does Unraid deal with the situation when one disk is full and I cannot add to this folder anymore as this would exceed disk space. Would Unraid then move other folders to another disk that I can add more to this folder?

Wow, this is great. Wasn't aware that this is possible. Assume user shares also make things easier with Sonarr/Radarr as I only have one user share to "point to"? For my example above, I would set the "depth" to "1" or "0"?

I have a fairly large array mainly used as media storage. I am considering to use user shares, but not sure whether they will fit my purpose. Let me illustrate with the example of TV shows my folder structure: Disk1/TV/Show1/Season1/Episode1 Disk1/TV/Show2/Season 1/Episode1 (...) Disk2/TV/Show3/Season1/Episode1 Disk2/TV/Show4/Season1/Episode1 (...) If I were to create a user share over disk 1 and 2 with folder /TV, I would have a very nice share including all TV shares. However, I think there would still be an issue. I am using Sonarr and Sonarr would start copying part of show1 on disk1 and part of disk2. Also, metadata may be spread across the two disks. This technically shouldn't bother me as the user share displays both together. However, I would like to keep the disks "autonomous" and not spreads episodes of the same show over two disks. Any thoughts whether what I am trying to accomplish is possible?