-Daedalus

Members
  • Posts

    361
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by -Daedalus

  1. Here's some stuff I could think of. Small drives: Pros Shorter parity check times Shorter rebuild times More distributed files (less chance of thrashing) Cons Louder More power hungry Slower read/write speeds Large drives: Pros Quieter Less power hungry Faster read/write speeds Cons Shorter parity check times Longer rebuild times Less distributed files (more chance of thrashing)
  2. Lovely little plugin. Two requests I'll give my +1 for: Theme-matching (or even just title font and a basic light/dark colour) No blinking icon when a page has a note (colour change is nice, but blinking is a little too much)
  3. Got'cha, thanks for the explanation. Though what I was requesting was different: I'd like the ability to say "Move according to tuning rules for all shares except these ones. For these ones, just follow stock mover rules (daily, etc.)"
  4. I saw that, but the wording of the help section makes it sound like it'll just never get moved off cache:
  5. It goes without saying, but I'll say it anyway: Fantastic plug-in, on my list of must-haves. Feature request: Ability to exclude/include specified shares in mover tuning, vs just moving on whatever the set schedule is (as if tuning wasn't installed). Use case: Newly added files go to cache and are added to Plex, and usually watched over the next few days (they're popular at the time, etc) so I like them to hang around for a few days to avoid issues around hard drive thrashing. I have several things backing up to cache (perf reasons), which I'd like moved to array every night as they don't need to live on cache for the 5 days like everything else. Unless of course I'm missing a way to do this as-is!
  6. +1 I'd like to see this everywhere, to be honest, and the ability to click a column to sort by would be nice.
  7. If I remember right, Tom had mentioned looking into it, around the time of release originally. Haven't heard anything about it since though.
  8. Slightly off-topic here, but I feel the Main tab UI towards the bottom could do with some work. There's a lot of very important info that feels a little like it's been bolted together over time, without much thought to cohesivness. Maybe something like a dedicated information box - maybe it's empty most of the time, but gets populated with important info when something changes: "Encryption key is missing" "Disk X has failed, and is being emulated" "Formatting will update parity information. Previously emulated data will be lost" etc...
  9. Nice! Since there's lots of room, is it possible for us to get this shown by default in a column?
  10. Yup, definitely +1 for this. The UI feels a little bloated when you start adding a lot of extra entries.
  11. At the moment, this defaults to en-US. I have to manually set each of my VMs to en-UK to accommodate special characters in certain passwords. Would be nice to have a global option for this. Maybe under date and time settings or something?
  12. Pretty much title. At the moment, we can see share type (public/secure/private) over SMB/NFS, but not if this is exported or not. It could be colours, or italics/bold, a symbol, or even the full word, but an indicator of some sort of no/yes(hidden)/yes would be cool.
  13. Agreed. An implication of my feature request would be that the remainder of the parity would have to be checked at some point before the new disk is added. But I think on balance a bunch of parity reads one time - when a bigger data drive is added - is better than a bunch of parity reads at every parity check when you're not running big disks. As I say, just food for thought.
  14. And I totally understand that, but I'd be curious to see how many people are in my situation. Most people (I'd guess) expand their storage relatively infrequently, and given SATA ports are finite, I go for the biggest, reasonably priced €/TB drive to expand, and usually more than one at once. This usually means I'm replacing parity first, and putting the previous parity drives in the array. In this case, even replacing two smaller drives, I came away with 12TB more storage, and the ability to add 18TB disks in future, instead of 10TB ones. This isn't huge on the priority list, obviously. I just thought I'd flag it, given that something like 40% of the check (3 days, with parity tuning) is wasted every month.
  15. I have a mix of 4, 8, and 10TB data drives. I have two 18TB parity drives. Every month, 8TB of parity is needlessly checked. Is it possible to have parity finish at the 10TB mark?
  16. One of mine I'm using at present. Fairly generic, but looks nice, and stuff at either side is easy to read.
  17. +1! I have DHCP-res on my router, but I still forget. I have last octet in the VM description, but a dedicated column for the address would be lovely. Also as a side-request: The ability to resize, move, and order-by columns would be cool.
  18. I know, just adding the +1 because the request was for support for this on the UI.
  19. +1 I'd like this as well. Having an entire share just for logs is a little much I think.
  20. Please yes. I'm rsyncing this at the moment, but I'd love a native option for it.
  21. Changed Status to Solved Changed Priority to Other
  22. That did it. Just needed a restart of the array. Thanks once again!
  23. It was one of the first I created years ago, but the disk changes are recent. I'm pretty sure the array has been restarted since doing that, but I'll give it a go once there's not much happening.