grandprix

Roger that, I suppose given the circumstance, BOINC being overwhelmed is a great thing. PS, sending you a PM about something totally unrelated.

Understood now. These are my settings. In fact I'm not yet limiting via pinning (though it seems that wont matter from what I recall reading above), only percentage from within the client configuration. I don't suppose I have any control as to how many tasks it grabs? From what I recall reading years ago, the tasks/units have to be made by a person and I suspect given the COVID epidemic, they're "dried up". I appreciate the response.

I somewhat wish I had the issue others are experiencing in regards to the LSIO BOINC docker utilizing "too many" resources, as mine is the complete opposite, whereas, it's using only two cpu/ht's. I admit to being ignorant to how BOINC (or any shared computing type of program) works, so perhaps the "task" or "work" only needs two cpu/ht's? Though, it would seem like a waste of the 16/32 machine it is running on.

In my quest to find out why a few (roughly 50-100) artwork's were missing from movies and/or why it wouldn't let me manually upload ones (as a great deal would show only a clip from the video), I'm stumped. It seems a permissions issue, but, I wouldn't know where to begin as I'm using the linuxserver.io docker. I admit, I'm far more ignorant to docker operation/containers than I probably should be. I cannot seem to find a rhyme or reason as to why the movies missing artwork are actually missing them. I suspect that's an issue on Plex's scrapping end, I really don't know though. I've changed nothing, beside finally going from 6.5 to 6.5.2 two weeks ago, though in talking with my family (friends/users/etc.) it seems the problem of missing artwork has been around for longer than I would have liked. So I cannot say for certain when this all began, sorry. Log attached, if any others are needed please don't hesitate. The SQLite errors concern me, suggesting perhaps DB corruption? But not sure that would tie in with permission issues if there even is corruption, so, hence the entire PMS log. Thanks in advance any and all. I decided to take a peek at the directory in line 2142 (of the attached log), to notice that the files in: /config/Library/Application Support/Plex Media Server/Metadata/Movies/f/64abc8a978d651df67dfefd48882464097bc49c.bundle/Contents/_combined/posters/ Are user root group root, whereas, going to another (or most others) they are user nobody and group (and begin with @com.plexapp.agents, vice just com.plexapp.agents) FWIW. Plex Media Server.log

Did this card go well or did it nuke Tinker off the Earth?

I'm not done replying, there's no reason to run away with the ball back home. "Why? Are you afraid someone might find out if your drives are still in warranty?". -- I can see no other suggested inflection/tone but sarcasm. That, or he genuinely believes I care if others find out any remaining warranty. My reasons are my own, I made no attempt to shove my reasons down anyone's throat. However, lets expand on that, since warranty was brought up. RMA status which may or may not provide a city/state and/or tracking number for a return on an RMA. Honestly, I hadn't given the "warranty" approach much thought, as I just would never want to share my serial number to begin with. Now, if you personally asked for diagnostics, I wouldn't bother anonymizing. But again, let me stress, I did not make, demand, etc. that they be removed by the utility. I simply made a statement, that, if a post-reboot diagnostics was still useful, then to trurl to let me know, as I didn't want my serial numbers shared. Meaning, I would then, if post-reboot diagnostics were useful, run the diagnostics, obscure the serial numbers (and MAC ID's, as those are in there as well), then provide them. But as you can imagine, it takes a bit of work, thus time, in case he were standing by looking for them to be posted. I do hope this shines a little light on a subject that, I really didn't think I'd talk about. If I were perturbed about -anything- it would definitely be that system logs are -still- overwritten, to which, I really cannot figure out. Upon start-up (not shutdown as there may not always be a proper shutdown), rename system.log to system.lo2 or something. Seems so relatively simple of a task, which I'd think would be helpful. If this already exists, then it's not being included in the diagnostics, that I saw, and I went through every file quite diligently. However, ALL this really isn't a linuxserver.io support issue, so my apologies. Though I did want to give a response out of respect to those with replies based off what transpired. ** As to the issue I had. I simply went to apps, selected linuxserver.io "plex" to install, and used a "my" template. It was a chance yes, but, it was the only post that I could find in regards to missing or orphaned containers/images. It seems to have done the job just fine.

I didn't make a request for them not to be. My business is my own as to why I'd rather they not be displayed. I would have taken you seriously if you weren't a smart ass about it in your rhetorical question. But so seems to be the trend here in these forums anymore. So many abrasive replies to those with questions, concerns, etc. A sense of entitlement almost. I really do miss how things were 7 years ago, but alas, those days are seemingly done. Keep in mind, I've demonstrated no less respect in my reply than I was extended in yours.

Well, woops, botched the file attachment on the first post. Hadn't realized that before reboot. So, would a post-reboot diagnostics help since, I see unRAID still overwrites system logs rather than making a copy upon reboot. If they're still of help, let me know, as I prefer to not have full serial numbers in the logs (which I just realized it shares even when anonymized).

3.3.2 Yep, it selects "To" check-box by default for every drive, but, my newest (emptiest) drive. For that one, it has "From" selected by default. What I mean by fighting with me is. If I begin unselecting the "To" check-boxes, when I get to the newest drive to deselect "From", it won't let me, clicking the checkbox does nothing. Would it be rude to request/suggest a "deselect all" and "select all" box above the to and from columns? It behaves goofy. Then when I am able to wrangle proper response, having all "to" deselected, and then somehow (its sporadic) manage to select "to" for the empty drive, I'll select a drive as the "From", things go well, I can select the share/folder for that drive. Peachy. Though when I go to the next drive and select "From", bam, it re-selects "To" for every drive on the list not marked as "From". I'm about to head out to a friends house for BBQ and the fight. But, later on I can and will gladly make a small video of its behavior if that would help beyond my explanations above. I'm using the latest version of FF in case it is a browser "thing" going on.

I've revisited this plugin time to time and each time, I well "don't get it." I'll explain the best that I can. "Scatter" - this makes sense and seems like the "option?" that I would like to use. I've added a hard drive to the array. It's relatively empty (besides the newest few grabs, all TV eps.). Upon accessing the GUI, I'm presented with my entire array, however, every disk (including the Cache, is there an option to ignore the cache? I use my SSD cache only for dockers) has "to" selected and the newest emptiest drive has "from" selected. This seems backwards from my perhaps flawed logic. Then the GUI seems to fight against me (in an insistent manner, borderline annoyingly) when attempting to deselect the "to" check-boxes, insisting on keeping my emptiest (new) hard drive with its "from" check-boxed. Ugg? Is this a passive plugin or active? Meaning, do I actually have to initiate any and all moves this thing will do? Or is it active, constantly running and making adjustments as deemed necessary? If the latter, then I certainly dont it to move files from my least filled to all the others that are much closer to being filled. 25 pages is a bit to read though, though I'm doing so now, however, in the meantime and in case those questions aren't answered anywhere in the thread, I figured I'd ask. I appreciate the time and effort put into this, don't misread my seemingly critical questions. They're not I assure you.

Ah good a reset grabs the latest. That's golden. However, I was under the impression from reading on Plex's forums that the Live TV version is a Beta, specifically. Not just a Plex Pass version but Beta. I suppose I either misunderstood of the person who replied on their forums didn't explain it clearly. I'll restart the Plex Docker and see what it gets me. Thank you.

The PMS version which has Live TV enabled is Beta, or so is my understanding anyway. How are you guys enabling Beta from within the linuxserver.io docker? I looked at the Github FAQ and it doesn't list beta as a valid version choice. Or is this just conversation regarding the new Live TV function in a general sense of it all?

Yes, or can send email directly to me: [email protected] Roger that. It was your email address that the invoice for the second-key originated, thus the one I replied to. I sent a second email just in case and I'll exercise patience. Appreciate the reply.

This seemed to be the place to post. For those of us whom had purchased the "unRAID Server Second-Key" back in the day (mine specifically was Feb. 2014) who are just now finally getting around to utilizing it (bigger hard drives in an already 24 bay case post-pone this build), is the process of replying to the email that was generated with our Flash GUID still correct? It's only been 11 hours that I replied to the email as instructed (but again back in 2014) with my Flash GUID and currently I am not exceeding any device limitation, however, I'd like to. I haven't received a bounce back, nor is Tom's email address going to spam (as that was the email addressed used back then). So this isn't a "hey its been a whole 11 hours, get movin'!" type of email, rather, just asking for confirmation if replying to the email is the process one should take still. Again, for those that purchased the "second-key" back in the day. Nothing more nothing less. TIA!

Might also be worth mentioning that recent versions of unRAID do NOT take the array offline to clear a disk. If you add a data disk to a new slot in an array that already has parity, it must be clear so parity will remain valid. It used to be that unRAID would take the array offline for this, so preclearing was invented. People still use preclear to test disks, but the clearing part isn't strictly necessary anymore, and in any case, a new data slot in a parity array is the only scenario that requires a clear disk. Yeah, these hard drives will be replacing the remaining three 2TB drives in this particular unRAID. So the purpose of pre-clearing is for testing for sure. @Frank I appreciate the links. I used to know how to do it inside and out, but, had gotten, erm, accustomed (dare I say lazy lol) to using the Plugin. *Edited: Also trurl, thank you for that. I thought I had screen on before, but, evidently (and clearly) not. Not sure I would've looked at the settings had you not mentioned it, so I thank you.