Kilack

I migrated all the drives to XFS, took a long time.. but worth it... a stable system... loving it. Now I am really enjoying the step up from Version 5

A really nice plugin, thanks. it would be great if there was a select ALL/deselect ALL. There also seems to be a small display bug in gather mode. If i go into gather mode and expand out a share then select an item, it lists the drives that the item appears on - perfect. So Item A - Disk 1 Disk 3 I then select a second Item and then it kind of breaks. Item A - Disk6 Item B - Disk 1 Disk 3 So it seems to get confused, and puts Item A's drives against the new item selected and puts what should be Item B's drive against the first selected show. Quite easy to reproduce, let me know if you need anything

Yeah this is exactly what I did last week, changed from the same cards over to M1015's (LSI). Just made sure I put the cables into the same ports, rebooted, no issues at all, just came straight up.

Hi, I was using version 5 of Unraid up until about a year ago, then shifted to version 6 which I really like. Unfortunately I had freezes that would occur ranomly, sometimes it would go two weeks, other times just a few days. It seemed to happen when there was a lot of disk access from multiple sources, eg something trying to write while another trying to read. What happened is that, the web interface would stop responding and the shares would die. You could still telnet in though, what I found was that if I went into /mnt and went through each disk and did a ls command, i would eventually strike a disk that wasnt responding. I had two marvel sas cards and thought maybe it was incompatability with those (some known issues with version 6). Recently I just swapped those out for IBM M1015's cross flashed into IT mode. The same thing is happening though Before the ls command would die on different drives however so far its been the same drive 3 times in a row.. no errors on it if i run parity etc but for some reason it's frozen up and not responding at all. Is this a type of behaviour a drive could exhibit? anything else I should be looking for? It is a WD Red 3TB

Hi, On 6.3, ran out of space on one drive, moved a big folder over to another drive. Now in windows i cannot get into that folder, gives access denied error. I have rebooted etc but still the same, even ran a disk check on actual drive where the data is. I checked the folder was actually removed off the old drive too, yes. If I telnet into unraid, all the directory structure is there and all the files. I am stumped. Any ideas?

2 days ago I took the plunge and upgraded from a 5.xx beta after running it for several years with no issues to 6.2.4. I had never upgraded earlier as it was working just fine and am a firm believer of if it ain't broke, don't change it. However 2 parity drives was a big pull.. not worried about vm's or docker etc, as already have a standalone machine that runs that. I upgraded, did a clean install, wiped out the flash card and started clean. All was fine, interface is nice!! - like it. So everything is fine until about 20 hours into using it.. Then I see some apps complaining it cant see the share and starts alerting. Check on local computer cannot access the share. Cannot access it via the webui either. Weird that one computer that was already attached can still see the shares though but no others in the house can. Computer that can still see the shared SMB's cannot see the interface though, just times out. I can still telnet into the unraid from any machine, though none can access the webui/shares now, to start with they could. Please keep in mind, no network changes have been made at all and the setup has worked fine for 2-3 years with no changes apart from disk additions. So I am stumped. Restarted Unraid, worked fine with all pc's using it, but after another 8 or so hours same issue... new connections not tolerated. Some computers can still access shares but cant get into the webui. Tempted to roll back to beta 13 i believe it was.. but hoping someone can help me Any ideas? tower-diagnostics-20170102-1921.zip

I'd second that, I have been on beta 11 for a month or so now without issue and using these cards. I had the blk error on beta 12 and quickly moved off it. I can't really comment on parity check times as can't remember how long it took when I was using beta 12 for that brief period of time.. thanks mike. I think I'll give it a try.. I'd rather have some slow read/write speeds than a completely unusable setup Correct me if I'm wrong. the best way, if i have a saslp-mv8, is to downgrade to 5b11, right? i

I had two WD's fail in the same week and they were only about a month old. Very rare though. Apart from that, I have some pc's that have hard drives that are about 12-15 years old and still going strong... I have the old bigfoots that still work.. The only drives I have ever had that have failed are these two wd's.... and seriously.. I have about 50 hard drives.. in computers ranging back to 386's... I don't throw hardware out... I always buy a new machine... but hd's at least for me have been very reliable.. but still i would never risk data without at least some protection (unraid) and a backup of really serious data...(zfs raidz2).

Assuming you have a license for the new flash drive then yes.

As for the file allocation method, it really is up to you as in each circumstance you might want something different. eg for my tv shares, I always use most free because I want new shows to go on the disk with the most free space which makes more sense to me because of the way tv shows will grow a lot so you want new shows on a disk with the most space. for movies fill up or high water would be suitable because once you have a movie it doesn't grow like a tv show does. Some like high water because it distributes more evenly and they think that makes it safer in case two drives fail.... you will lose less data...

Sounds on the low side but 60MB+ is definitely on the high side unless you are running SSD's or using a cache. I think the vast majority are around 20-30MB.. I have the latest black WD drive as parity and earx's as data drives and I get around 30MB. So yes you should be aiming for more but 60 is way unrealistic without using a cache drive.

My thoughts are, unless there is some feature in 5 beta 12 that you desperately must have then don't bother upgrading. It is a beta. If what you are using now is working then why change? If it ain't broke, don't change it!!! . Patience is a virtue etc etc, wait until its a non beta if you can.

Doesn't sound good... I guess you have tried flashing it again, like running 5it.bat etc? Or even, the bat that wipes it.. is that 3.bat? I'd go through them all again and hope that one might pick it up. Very weird though.

I'm using beta 11 with the AOC-SASLP-MV8 and have no issues at all. Seems most people having issues are on beta 12 and using two of these cards, I just have one in at the moment. I have a couple of the m1015's which has been flashed to generic LSI firmware it IT mode and also i got a couple of these AOC-USASLP-L8i (also lsi cards) but havent used them yet with unraid. If you are going to buy something go for one of these LSI ones, they leave more options too as they are supported by solaris and bsd, where as your marvel ones aren't. It means if you ever did want to experiment with zfs etc you wouldn't need to buy new cards. I run both, unraid and some zfs on solaris so makes sense to get cards that can be used by both in my opinion so I can swap them around etc.

If you run 1.bat does it pick it up?