jbartlett

In theory, if your docker/VM's are running on your cache drive, it should not affect your parity check speeds.

I think a really good plugin idea is a plugin which checks for new plugins and emails if it finds any.

It's fine to run in 64bit UNRAID

This shouldn't be possable under the normal flow. When you replace a file that already exists, it overwrites the version in the array and not writing to the cache drive. Only new files get put on the cache drive. I'd verify which one is correct and take the appropriate action and remove the other. I know that if you have dupes in the same path on an array drive, UNRAID presents only the first one found working in numerical ascending order from drive 1 to drive x. Not sure if the cache drive gets plugged in last or first.

Checked out the docker bundle and found the config file, used the following to create the container: root@NAS:/mnt/vm/WHS2011# docker run -d -h ${HOSTNAME} --name=crashplan -v /mnt/user/crashplan:/config -v /mnt/user:/data -v /etc/localtime:/etc/localtime:ro -p 4242:4242 -p 4243:4243 gfjardim/crashplan

The error I'm getting is: Error: The directory named as part of the path /config/supervisord.log does not exist. For help, use /usr/bin/supervisord -h

Yup, I created it using the example given docker run -d -h ${HOSTNAME} --name=crashplan -v /mnt/user:/data -v /etc/localtime:/etc/localtime:ro -p 4242:4242 -p 4243:4243 gfjardim/crashplan I'll try removing the container and recreating it using a mix of both of your examples

I've installed the container but when I start it with "docker start crashplan", it seems to exit immediately. I'm not familiar enough with Docker to give you any logs because I don't know where to look.

It is my understanding that the cache memory is used and released as other needs demand. Ie - it uses only free memory. It doesn't just cache directories but files as well so if you read files on one but not the other, it would skew things. Could be wrong. *shrug*

There is an improvement for the Balls to the Wall setting on 64bit vs 32bit but it's marginal. For around the first half of the smallest drive, I saw maybe 10MB/sec improvement but after that things were pretty even. http://strangejourney.net/UNRAID/32vs64.html (you can zoom in on the graph) Odd how Seagate drives seem to consistently have a performance hit in the first 20GB - do other brands show this as well?

I have. I got the same performance with lower numbers. I'm using the Balls to the Wall setting but the script reported slightly higher values for me for optimal speeds. I can't speak to same performance et all because I was focusing on the fastest performance.

The process makes a copy of /proc/mdcmd which from every indication of my current parity speeds of 161.9 MB/sec @ 150GB isn't being affected in the slightest. Though I could run another parity check after the current run but without the monitor and compare it to see.

I'm currently running a parity check on 5.0.4 and tracking the speed every 15 seconds, should be done in about an hour. Then I'll upgrade to v6, run the turnables script again, and then run another parity check - again tracking the speed every 15 seconds. I'll be able to present a spiffy graph comparing the two when it's done.

Feature request: If the last test of the first pass in a full-auto run is the highest, extend the test until two subsequent tests fall under it.

I don't know if it's the 64bit version of unraid or adjusting the ulimit but the script FLEW through my directories in just seconds, much faster than before.

Ah - the script for tracking the parity speeds isn't in that file. It's part of a Dashboard plugin set I'm working on.

http://www.highcharts.com/

It's amazing the improvements you get when you take out older & slower drives I'm putting the finishing touches on a new script that'll benchmark all drives in the UNRAID system (with graph!) so you can identify any bottlenecks.

I made a graph of the parity check performance utilizing my three and four TB Seagate drives after taking out a much slower 2 TB drive. http://strangejourney.net/Temp/unraid-tunables-tester.html

Here's a graph showing the difference in a parity drive rebuild and a parity sync with my mix of one 2TB drive, three 3TB drives, and six 4TB drives (including parity drive) http://strangejourney.net/Temp/paritybuildsync.html

I have a script that is taking a snapshot of the parity rebuild/sync speed every 15 seconds (recording speed @ position) and storing it in a JSON array. I'll share a graph comparing the two using optimized values from the tunables script once it's gone through both. Just started the rebuild....

I wonder what this script would report for someone who has 32bit and 64bit builds of UNRAID?

Are you referring to speeding up every time you past a disc threshold? That's to be expected.

Upgraded all my 1.5TB EARS drives to Seagate 4TB, ran the script again. Tunables Report from unRAID Tunables Tester v2.2 by Pauven NOTE: Use the smallest set of values that produce good results. Larger values increase server memory use, and may cause stability issues with unRAID, especially if you have any add-ons or plug-ins installed. Test | num_stripes | write_limit | sync_window | Speed --- FULLY AUTOMATIC TEST PASS 1 (Rough - 20 Sample Points @ 3min Duration)--- 1 | 1408 | 768 | 512 | 78.5 MB/s 2 | 1536 | 768 | 640 | 67.5 MB/s 3 | 1664 | 768 | 768 | 60.7 MB/s 4 | 1920 | 896 | 896 | 67.3 MB/s 5 | 2176 | 1024 | 1024 | 64.4 MB/s 6 | 2560 | 1152 | 1152 | 60.9 MB/s 7 | 2816 | 1280 | 1280 | 62.2 MB/s 8 | 3072 | 1408 | 1408 | 56.9 MB/s 9 | 3328 | 1536 | 1536 | 63.7 MB/s 10 | 3584 | 1664 | 1664 | 65.9 MB/s 11 | 3968 | 1792 | 1792 | 61.0 MB/s 12 | 4224 | 1920 | 1920 | 61.0 MB/s 13 | 4480 | 2048 | 2048 | 65.2 MB/s 14 | 4736 | 2176 | 2176 | 69.9 MB/s 15 | 5120 | 2304 | 2304 | 64.0 MB/s 16 | 5376 | 2432 | 2432 | 64.1 MB/s 17 | 5632 | 2560 | 2560 | 63.3 MB/s 18 | 5888 | 2688 | 2688 | 66.8 MB/s 19 | 6144 | 2816 | 2816 | 63.8 MB/s 20 | 6528 | 2944 | 2944 | 62.2 MB/s --- Targeting Fastest Result of md_sync_window 512 bytes for Special Pass --- --- FULLY AUTOMATIC TEST PASS 1b (Rough - 4 Sample Points @ 3min Duration)--- 21 | 896 | 768 | 128 | 88.8 MB/s 22 | 1024 | 768 | 256 | 81.7 MB/s 23 | 1280 | 768 | 384 | 83.1 MB/s 24 | 1408 | 768 | 512 | 76.6 MB/s --- Targeting Fastest Result of md_sync_window 128 bytes for Final Pass --- --- FULLY AUTOMATIC TEST PASS 2 (Final - 16 Sample Points @ 4min Duration)--- 25 | 856 | 768 | 8 | 74.4 MB/s 26 | 864 | 768 | 16 | 78.8 MB/s 27 | 880 | 768 | 24 | 72.0 MB/s 28 | 888 | 768 | 32 | 77.1 MB/s 29 | 896 | 768 | 40 | 74.2 MB/s 30 | 904 | 768 | 48 | 79.1 MB/s 31 | 912 | 768 | 56 | 80.9 MB/s 32 | 920 | 768 | 64 | 83.5 MB/s 33 | 928 | 768 | 72 | 84.9 MB/s 34 | 936 | 768 | 80 | 84.7 MB/s 35 | 944 | 768 | 88 | 86.0 MB/s 36 | 960 | 768 | 96 | 85.1 MB/s 37 | 968 | 768 | 104 | 88.5 MB/s 38 | 976 | 768 | 112 | 87.0 MB/s 39 | 984 | 768 | 120 | 85.9 MB/s 40 | 992 | 768 | 128 | 87.3 MB/s Completed: 2 Hrs 21 Min 36 Sec. Best Bang for the Buck: Test 1 with a speed of 78.5 MB/s Tunable (md_num_stripes): 1408 Tunable (md_write_limit): 768 Tunable (md_sync_window): 512 These settings will consume 55MB of RAM on your hardware. Unthrottled values for your server came from Test 37 with a speed of 88.5 MB/s Test 21 had the highest result. Notably, it had a higher md_sync_window window. Maybe an additional test pass to test for differeing md_sync_window values on the best setting? Tunable (md_num_stripes): 968 Tunable (md_write_limit): 768 Tunable (md_sync_window): 104 These settings will consume 37MB of RAM on your hardware. This is -2MB less than your current utilization of 39MB. NOTE: Adding additional drives will increase memory consumption. In unRAID, go to Settings > Disk Settings to set your chosen parameter values. I suspect my 2TB WD drive is still holding me back with speeds hovering around 80 MB/sec but really jumping when it gets past the 2TB mark.

Any progress on a version that tests the writes? I'm currently replacing my last three 1.5TB EARS with Seagate 4TB's and the rebuild is a lot slower.