jbuszkie

I'm getting the not available with ESPHome now.

Someone asked for the steps I used. So here they are., 1. download the ISO image from the Samsung website. (Link above - make sure you grab the correct image) 2. Make a bootable USB flash drive from the ISO. (I used Rufus - but I'm sure there are others) I did this on Windows. 3. If you feel paranoid, I would make sure you have a everything on your cache drive backed up. - I didn't lose data but better to be safe than sorry. 4. Shutdown Unraid. 5. Yank Unraid flash drive and put in the Samsung ISO image drive you just created. 6. boot the Samsung image and follow the prompts to update the firmware. Some folks had issues with a USB keyboard in the past. I had no issues. 7. Power down the unraid machine again 8. take out the Samsung flash drive and put back in the Unraid flash drive. 9. Power on the Unraid machine and verify you have the updated firmware.

Well I just, successfully updated the firmware on both drives. Hopefully I won't see any issues with the overtemp any more. I was able to update using the ISO image burned to a flash drive. I got the image from here. It warned about possibly erasing all data but it did not do that for me. My data was intact, thank god! So now we'll see if get those overtemps again! Jim

I was able to update using the ISO image on the samsung website I got it from here. It scared the hell out of me as it warned ~"This will or may erase all data" So I just did one at a time (I have two) and each were fine. No data was erased! Some folks on other website claimed that the ISO didn't work and described how to do it manually. I didn't have to go that route, thankfully...

Thanks! I ended up getting a 10T Red plus. It was cheaper than the 8T! go figure! I'll use that to replace my 1st parity drive which is 8T. So now both drives parity drives will be 10T. Now I just have to remember how to do that after I replace my 4T that has some read errors.

For my own benefit and I don't have to find it again. Here is a link on how to update the FW https://blog.quindorian.org/2021/05/firmware-update-samsung-ssd-in-linux.html/ Now I haven't tried it yet...

Thanks! That does seem to be the issue. Maybe I'll try to update the FW of the drive(s) if I can figure out how to do it safely. Changing the boot config seems easier though. But updated the FW is probably the better solution?? Jim

I was having this issue too. Further along the article linked above talks about updating the firmware of the drive to fix this as well. To me that seems like a better fix... But I'm not sure how I would go about updating the FW! It seems a little scary! 🙂

Every once and a while I get this error reported Event: Unraid Cache disk temperature Subject: Alert [TOWER] - Cache disk overheated (84 C) Description: Samsung_SSD_980_1TB_******** (nvme0n1) Importance: alert Then a couple minutes later it returns to normal? I have two nvme disks and I see this (seemingly) random on either one. I don't think I've seen both at the same time. I see one of these every couple of days or so.. I find it hard to believe these are real.. Are they? Are they doing some sort of SSD cleanup? Jim

Well my latest parity check caused some read errors on one of my older drives. So time to replace, I guess! I can get a 8T Blue for ~$120 Or a Ironwolf for ~$160 or a WD Red Plus for ~$165. Does it really matter if I get a Blue for a data disk? In the past I've shucked drive from externals.. But I see the Blue is cheaper and the reds are not that much more expensive than externals. I think they are all CMR. Thanks!

PM sent

The new test is saying my unraid_notify is corrupted. I can download it and it looks just fine? I'd post it here, but there is soo much I'd have to take out! (e-mails, passwords..) How do you want to debug?

Damn! I was hoping that 6.10 would fix/address this like @Squid alluded to... Fingers crossed that whatever change they going to do wasn't put in yet...

I, Normally, don't have main or dashboard open. For me, it's the docker window and a couple of the docker web interfaces. And in the past it was open web terminals (I only use putty now!). So I don't know if the 6.10 release will fix for all.. Fingers crossed that it will though!!! And I do hope that they are looking into this as it's slightly annoying... Not bad enough to bug them constantly... but always hoping for a post here from them saying that they found the issue! 🙂

Is @limetech even looking at this? He chimed in a while ago and then crickets... There really a lot of us that have this issue. Now I don't know if this "a Lot" is still in the noise for the amount total unraid users so it's not a big enough issue... I've just had this happen twice last week... And then sometimes it goes for months without hitting this.. *sigh*

Thanks! I just found this in the FAQ It mentions that I SHOULD see "no balance found on /mnt/cache" What was weird is I didn't see anything on the main page that said that a balance was in progress like I do when I add/replace a regular drive to the array... So I was a little worried... Glad all is good!

I added a second drive to my cache pool as per the manual. I can't tell if it's automatically in RAID1? I got a warning when I first added the disk Event: Unraid Cache disk message Subject: Warning [TOWER] - pool BTRFS too many profiles (You can ignore this warning when a pool balance operation is in progress) Description: Samsung_SSD_980_1TB_S64ANJ0R676360X (nvme0n1) Importance: warning Do I have to do a manual balance? Am I protected? or do I need to do that full balance? Thanks, Jim

So I wanted to upgrade my cache and eventually make it raid 1. I have two nvme slots but if I used the other slot on the MB I'd have to give up two sata connectors. I didn't want to do that. So I bought a PCIe 3.0 x4 card to NVME. My MB has 3.0 PCIe so great I thought. So I plug it into one of my non x16 slots and powered up. I ran the disk speed benchmark and I was unimpressed. Less than 1G/s I ran the onboard existing NVME drive and it was 3x faster! I'm like crap! Are my slots not really 3.0? Was there some limitation in the slot I used? So I pull up the MB manual and it looks like I have 3x x16 slots (of which only one can be x16 other wise 2x 8x) the last x16 is only x4. And I have 3x PCIe 1x slots. Guess what I plugged my 4x card into... Yes a 1x slot!! So I opened up the case again and move the card over to the real x4 slot... And BOOM! 3x-ish. the speed! I have no idea why I though the little 1x slots were 4x??? I'm an idiot sometimes!! 🙂

Has anyone moved away from crash plan to something else? I heard versioning is on 90 days now! CP is getting worse and worse about what they back up and now how long they keep revisions! Is there something better/ cheaper out there now?

I am not.. I'm more diligent now about closing any web terminals I try to keep the browser on the setting page. I did notice I got this once when I had a grafana webpage auto refreshing. Not sure if that was related at all.. Even if we do have the dash board open all the time, it shouldn't matter??

The manual never used to be useful for stuff like this. I've always relied on the knowledge here! It seems like the manual has improved!

This is what I did from Squid's post I found It seems to be rebuilding. I'm getting more memory tomorrow so I'll try to replace that sata cable tomorrow or switch the cable to my last free slot and mark that slot as bad! 😞

1) I want to rebuild on top of the old disk How do I do that? Unraid has it redballed

Ugh... I hate to bring up an old thread... But I'm having issues again. It looks like it's the same slot as above. I just rebooted my server and upon restart drive 8 became red balled! Nov 12 09:46:52 Tower kernel: ata8.00: exception Emask 0x10 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x400000 action 0x6 frozen Nov 12 09:46:52 Tower kernel: ata8.00: irq_stat 0x08000000, interface fatal error Nov 12 09:46:52 Tower kernel: ata8: SError: { Handshk } Nov 12 09:46:52 Tower kernel: ata8.00: failed command: WRITE DMA EXT Nov 12 09:46:52 Tower kernel: ata8.00: cmd 35/00:08:30:14:01/00:01:00:02:00/e0 tag 19 dma 135168 out Nov 12 09:46:52 Tower kernel: res 50/00:00:37:15:01/00:00:00:02:00/e0 Emask 0x10 (ATA bus error) Nov 12 09:46:52 Tower kernel: ata8.00: status: { DRDY } Nov 12 09:46:52 Tower kernel: ata8: hard resetting link Nov 12 09:47:02 Tower kernel: ata8: softreset failed (1st FIS failed) Nov 12 09:47:02 Tower kernel: ata8: hard resetting link Nov 12 09:47:12 Tower kernel: ata8: softreset failed (1st FIS failed) Nov 12 09:47:12 Tower kernel: ata8: hard resetting link Nov 12 09:47:47 Tower kernel: ata8: softreset failed (1st FIS failed) Nov 12 09:47:47 Tower kernel: ata8: limiting SATA link speed to 1.5 Gbps Nov 12 09:47:47 Tower kernel: ata8: hard resetting link Nov 12 09:47:52 Tower kernel: ata8: softreset failed (1st FIS failed) Nov 12 09:47:52 Tower kernel: ata8: reset failed, giving up Nov 12 09:47:52 Tower kernel: ata8.00: disabled Nov 12 09:47:52 Tower kernel: ata8: EH complete Nov 12 09:47:52 Tower kernel: sd 8:0:0:0: [sdg] tag#20 UNKNOWN(0x2003) Result: hostbyte=0x04 driverbyte=0x00 cmd_age=60s Nov 12 09:47:52 Tower kernel: sd 8:0:0:0: [sdg] tag#20 CDB: opcode=0x8a 8a 00 00 00 00 02 00 01 14 30 00 00 01 08 00 00 Nov 12 09:47:52 Tower kernel: blk_update_request: I/O error, dev sdg, sector 8590005296 op 0x1:(WRITE) flags 0x800 phys_seg 33 prio class 0 Nov 12 09:47:52 Tower kernel: md: disk8 write error, sector=8590005232 Nov 12 09:47:52 Tower kernel: md: disk8 write error, sector=8590005240 Nov 12 09:47:52 Tower kernel: md: disk8 write error, sector=8590005248 Now I really believe that the disk is still good. How do I get unraid to try to rebuild onto that disk? As in how do I get it to believe that the disk is not redballed and try to rebuild to that disk? The other drive from the above post that had "errors" in this slot has been behaving fine in a different slot for over a year now. So I really think it's an issue with that slot. grr... I can't remember if I replaced that ata8 cable or not last time. Thanks, Jim

When I had this (I believe) I stopped my dockers one by one until it stopped coming.. And for me it was just the first one... Reboot will work as well...