CorneliousJD

Hi everyone, I have the following setup Motherboard: SuperMicro X9DRi-LN4F+ https://www.supermicro.com/manuals/motherboard/C606_602/MNL-1258.pdf CPU: 2x Intel Xeon E5-2650 v2 https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/sku/75269/intel-xeon-processor-e52650-v2-20m-cache-2-60-ghz/specifications.html SAS Card: LSI 9211-8i HBA https://docs.broadcom.com/doc/12353333 I am wondering if I buy this ASUS Hyper V2 NVMe to PCIe adapter that I'll have enough lanes to run it in 4x/4x/4x/4x bifurcation and not risk taking any lanes away from the LSI SAS card? https://www.asus.com/us/motherboards-components/motherboards/accessories/hyper-m-2-x16-card-v2/ I have already updated the BIOS to v3.4 so bifurcation is enabled/supported on my motherboard. I am seeing that each CPU has 40 lanes available and I have two CPUs so I should have plenty of lanes to spare, however I'm not super familiar with the layout of the PCIe lanes and which one links to which CPU etc. Can anyone help shed some light on this for me? How many total lanes do I get between my CPUs and my motherboard? I couldn't really find info on how many lanes are available on the mobo side. I really just want to make sure I'm not sacrificing performance or ripping lanes away from the LSI card to put in the M.2 card. Thanks in advance!

They are indeed. Is not having trim an issue? I'm admittedly not very familiar with its purpose. If so, in your opinion should I get a PCIe card that holds 2x M.2 drives and return the 2.5s and get M.2s instead so they are internal and on a different controller?

fstrim: /mnt/cache: FITRIM ioctl failed: Remote I/O error I had some older 2.5" Samsung EVO SSDs that had been starting to give me problems so I replaced them in Inland (MIcroCenter) enterprise SSDs just the other day. Ever since swapping them both out, I am getting the above error emailed to me on a daily basis. The new drives are connected to the same ports on the backplane and everything and I've never seen these errors before with the old drives. Any help is appreciated!

Was just going to suggest adding ports ahead of time that you anticipate needing. If you want to use default ports for games then yes, you need to edit the container every time to pass the correct ports through. If you're hosting *that* many games servers where AMP within Docker like this is problematic then perhaps a containerized AMP isn't the best solution for you?

Ah thank you, I was worried for a moment this was some change coming down from Ubiquiti, glad to see this project is being taken up to have an all-in-one container then. Keeps it simple for most. Thanks

Oh really? That's interesting, is that coming from Ubiquiti that's discontinuing the controller for linux or is it linuxserver discontinuing theirs? I hadn't heard of this so now I'm extra curious, as I know quite a few users who are self-hosting their controllers, but myself am not.

I'm not currently clear what this is for vs the other UniFi network/controller containers? What makes this different?

I'm open to that if there's still no movement on original project. You can edit your existing container to point it to the new work though if you want to give it a run for the time being still Without making a new template in CA.

You can just update the dockerhub repo to arcscloud/pastey:latest and that should pull their copy instead. I'm reluctant to adjust the template in the community apps section since arcscloud's work is just a fork of Cesura's original work.

WILL they? They don't supply a docker container. Why would they maintain a third party container?... this doesn't make sense. I also didn't develop this container, I simply made the template to run it on unRAID. I cannot assist everyone with issues they face with AMP. I have a full life outside of this container. The container itself runs. AMP runs. I host servers with it. It works. It is not beginner friendly, but it works.

Fair enough, the old plugin got around it somehow it seems, not sure how, or if it just took longer to load the page until it could display properly? Not sure and couldn't fathom a guess, but just wanted to check. Understandable, I think a list-only w/ no "running" or "stopped" below it would still be great, you could fit more containers per folder in the preview section that way if you stack them like the old plugin used to, but I actually think I like the icon look the more I'm using it now today. Once again, thanks for picking this up and making it compatible with 6.12 and hopefully beyond! Much appreciated.

Thanks - I did end up trying this but just ended up recreating via webUI, as organizing the orders took the longest here. My final result below for anyone who was interested in a before/after. I didn't want too much clutter so I opted for icons only since the label only still said if it was started or not, which wasn't necessary for me. I would like to see an option for label only where it just lists the text of the container that's clickable like the old docker folders plugin, but the icon-only looks sharp too! One thing I did notice is how going to the Docker page or the Dashboard page first has to load ALL the containers first and then finally it loads the plugin and the folders. This never used to be the case w/ the old plugin, is there any plans to increase performance so the folders show up right away instead of waiting for them? Thanks for making this plugin, it's great, and I'm glad to see it actively being developed!

Is there a way to convert from the DockerFolder plugin to this? I'd of course like to swap everyting over without re-doing everything. My gut tells me it's not possible but I'd like to check first

I agree, I split an ultrawide into 3 zones so my browser windows are less than 1920 wide, and I had 3 columns before and it looked and worked GREAT, and I'd really, REALLY like that same functionality back.

I see the same thing after my weekly CA appdata backup. I've been getting around this by simply using a userscript to run at 7:30AM daily (30 7 * * *) #!/bin/bash docker start TubeArchivist

I'm mobile but check the apps tab and type on "docker patch" There's a patch to fix that orange "not available" update. It's some issue with the way unRAID checks for docker updates. That "not available" means it can't check if there's an update, not that one *isn't* available. You probably have a lot of updates you are behind on, but install that patch, check for updates and let them ride.

Sorry, but what? The container updates fine. It's up to date The "docker version" is the official version. It sounds to me that perhaps you haven't applied the docker update patch that came out at the server level and you're not seeing "update unavailable" instead? Ps. You could still hit force update.

I am quite busy and can't say that this is an app I use regularly haha. But feel free to do a PR on GitHub against the template and add it and I can merge it so others benfit from the update. Alternately you can simply add it to your own instance of the container? No need to wait for me, just add your own mapping on your own isntall.

Sure, just pushed an update to the template, should be live in a few hours for new installs from CA. If you already have it installed you can just add the path you have from your screenshot for the same effect.

Where does the JSON file end up? There's no appdata path configured in the template so I'm not sure where I'm supposed to be editing these files at. Shouldn't they be stored in appdata to survive updates? I have many trackers I'd like to use this with to auto-login with to keep accounts active.

i don't know unfortuantely, you'd want to look up documentation for this specific platform, as this is really for unraid specific support for the template not working.

A force update certainly shouldn't break anything - have you looked at logs - what do the logs of the main container say when it ends up stopping? I think anyone here (myself included) will need some more info before we can really help. Also, not that I suggest this yet, but if all else fails you could blow away the entire stack of 3 containers and start fresh and restore from a snapshot backup within TA itself?

Which container, as there are 3. Did you replace the repo for the redisjson container? Which of the 3 said it didn't have an update available? Forcing an update shouldn't break anything.

I honestly didn't look at the redis stack logs, I just let it do it's thing. The path.repo variable was already there for me in the ES container hidden behind the "show more" part. So no changes there for me, all I did was drop in the replacement redis container and let it ride. I have 128GB of RAM on my system so I doubt low memory would ever be an issue for me, but perhaps the maintainers of the template, or TA devs can shed more light on the error you're seeing.