Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Carrosive

  • Rank
  1. Great - managed to find a reasonably priced Fujitsu D2607 (SAS2008) pre flashed in IT mode so I have that on the way. Thanks again!
  2. @johnnie.black Awesome, I'll see if the extended tests show any issues with the other drives and request RMA I believe it was a post of yours I saw in another thread from someone having an issue with their AOC-SASLP-MV8, recommending to get a LSI card instead. I'm considering getting a SilverStone SST-ECS02 (rebranded LSI SAS 9211-8i) to use instead as I'd prefer my server to be more stable and I'd like to keep virtualisation enabled, any thoughts?
  3. @johnnie.black I think I may be confusing info from all the threads I've been looking at. Replacement would be ideal, do you know if this is something that would be covered under warranty? I think I'll do extended tests on the other cards to see what they're like. Thanks again
  4. Thanks for the responses! @jonathanm Ah, I bought this card after seeing it in the UK recommended build on the hardware compatibility wiki page and being able to get it inexpensively. After reading your post I've come across other threads mentioning instability with the card which can be improved with disabling virtualisation as you say, however I would like to be able to run VM's on my server. The motherboard BIOS update is straight forward enough and I've managed to find instructions for updating the cards firmware. Since I've just started using unRAID, and as I can easily return the card and go without the additional hard drives for a while, I'm wondering if I should just bite the bullet and get something better to save me from headaches in the future. Something like the SilverStone SST-ECS02 (rebranded LSI SAS 9211-8i) seems like a relatively inexpensive alternative, I'm aware it will need flashed for IT mode. Any thoughts? @johnnie.black Tried to run an extended test however it failed shortly after starting, like it did with the short test, due to read failure. The drive was working fine and has gone unused so I'm leaning towards the issue being with my SATA card, I'll attempt to reassign it to the array when I get the card sorted out. Thanks for the info!
  5. I've been running unRAID for a few days now and one of my drives is acting strange so I thought I would ask for some advice. I built a new server to run unRAID using three new 3TB drives and once up and running I copied all my files from my previous server (Ubuntu) over. After the files were all moved I then moved the four 3TB drives I had in my previous server into the new server. On moving the drives I installed a Supermicro AOC-SASLP-MV8 for the additional SATA connections, I also reconnected the two new data drives from the mobo (as they were when first setup in unRAID) to this card leaving the parity drive connected to the mobo. The new drives and the drives moved from my previous server were all picked up by unRAID and on starting the array the files copied over to the new drives were still accessible so I don't think there's an issue with the card. (?) All four drives moved from my previous server to my new server were all pre-cleared, formatted and successfully added to the array. SMART reports from short self-tests were all good and the four moved drives have been unused for the couple days that they have been in the new server. Today though I noticed that the last disk in the array was marked as faulty with the red X, and the SMART report was empty: smartctl 6.5 2016-05-07 r4318 [x86_64-linux-4.9.30-unRAID] (local build) Copyright (C) 2002-16, Bruce Allen, Christian Franke, www.smartmontools.org Short INQUIRY response, skip product id A mandatory SMART command failed: exiting. To continue, add one or more '-T permissive' options. I tried changing the SATA connections (both power and data) and unRAID was still showing issues, but at this point didn't try to mount or run a self-test. I now have the drive connected using the original data cable but with a new power cable, with the array stopped I was able to mount the drive and get a SMART report. On running the short self-test unRAID shows there's an error, however the SMART reports overall health is showing as PASSED with no error's logged which is a bit confusing. The test is though shown under the self-test log with a status of "Completed: read failure". unRAID highlights the issue as "Current pending sector": I have attached the full report as a txt file rather than include it in full on this post. So this re-purposed drive had successfully been pre-cleared, reformatted and added to the array, however it is now showing as faulty after a couple days of being online without any direct usage. Would it be reasonable to continue using this disk or would this be a must replace kind of deal? It is one of four re-purposed drives, would it be advisable to run extended SMART self-checks on the other drives? or some other kind of test? Many thanks WDC_WD30EFRX-68EUZN0_WD-WCC4N4SCEYTH-20170831-1250.txt
  6. @tdallen Really helpful - thank you! Community Applications plugin looks great. Have installed Unassigned Devices however I was unable to mount my current array for whatever reason, currently copying via lftp in a SSH session on the new server and it's working well enough. +1 for leaving Parity out of the array for the initial copy, I forgot about this bit and was surprised to see the copy going at a measly 20MB/s... Once sorted I'm at 105MB/s Will be sure to check the SMART reports of the re-purposed drives, it's been months since I bothered to check them...
  7. I'm building a new server to replace my current one, this will be my switch to unRAID whilst taking the opportunity to upgrade hardware for more power and drives. My current server is running Ubuntu Server (16.04) from a USB drive, with four WD Red 3TB drives in a soft RAID 5 array for my data. It was originally built and used primarily as a media server, I've done the occasional tinkering and whilst it's been fun I no longer have the time to deal with the aftermath of things breaking and bringing the whole system down... I've decided to use unRAID as it looks like a great alternative. I plan to build the new server starting with three newly purchased WD Red 3TB drives. Once unRaid is setup I'll move the 5TB of data on my current server over to the new server via GbE; the current array easily saturates the GbE over FTP and I estimate it will take around 12 hours to move everything. Once the data is migrated and everything is running nicely, I will move the four drives in my current server into the new server. I'm posting here in hopes that you might be able to give me some tips to ease my switch over and to ensure unRAID is running optimally. I haven't detailed the builds in full as I wanted to keep this post short(ish); I plan to make a separate post of the build once complete however I'd be more than happy to post any more details on this thread if you so desire Some specific questions: I plan to add an SSD (128GB) as a cache drive once I have all seven HDD's in the new server, would there be any benefit to doing this from the start? I plan to use FTP to migrate the data, would there be a better way to do this? When the time comes to move the four drives from my current server over, should I reformat them externally? I plan to install applications I use on my current server (e.g. SABnzbd & Sonarr) as Docker Containers where available, I've never used Docker but I want to use this opportunity to learn it, would there be any drawbacks in doing so? (over plugin variants)
  8. These are just my observations, I'm by no means an expert Looking at the manual for your board (http://download.gigabyte.eu/FileList/Manual/mb_manual_ga-z170x-ud5_e.pdf page 30) it looks like one of the M.2 slots (M2D_32G) disables certain SATA ports in certain configs. Using the other slot (M2H_32G) doesn't disable any of the SATA ports (although it looks like it disables one of them if you use a SATA SSD in it) however using this M.2 slot will disable the bottom PCIe x16 slot (PCIEX4), this is mentioned at the bottom of page 10. The manual for your intended mobo (http://dlcdnet.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/SocketAM4/PRIME_X370-PRO/E12344_PRIME_X370-PRO_web_only_20170712.pdf?_ga=2.123104200.256215769.1503493061-627808063.1501325058) doesn't specify a similar limitation, but it wont hurt to check with support to be sure. Don't forget about the option of using a PCIe SATA card to give you more ports to work with if needed. Although it's easier to have enough ports on the mobo, there's always this option if you want to consider other boards.