bkastner

I presume you realize that "neat" is more a function of how you've logically organized your data (i.e. the shares and folder structures) than what physical disk something's on. One of the key benefits of UnRAID is the user share feature ... which provides a unified view of data that can be spread across many physical disks. This ability to have what in effect is an "unlimited" disk size, which can grow as necessary (by simply adding more disks to the array) allows you to organize your data as you like without the need to be concerned with which physical device it's stored on. The "split level" is primarily designed to allow key elements of a structure to be stored on the same physical disk (i.e. the .VOB's associated with a single DVD movie), so only one disk need be spun up to access that entity. Setting it at a level that effectively disables the ability to take advantage of the user share feature is more "messy" than neat Good point. It's just a perception thing. While I like the idea of splitting the share over multiple disks, I prefer a show being grouped together - though you are right - since I access the data via the share 99% of the time, where it sits is really academic.

Yup. They are my worst enemy. I am going to re-evaluate my settings to save me from headaches like this again. I still want things neat, but need to put a bit more thought into the layout.

root@CydStorage:/var/log# df -h /var/log Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on tmpfs 128M 128M 0 100% /var/log root@CydStorage:/var/log# That would explain it. Any suggestions on how I correct this? Can I increase the size, or are the common files that can be deleted to recover space?

I had mentioned an issue with mover that turned out to be a non-issue, however while investigating I've noticed that my syslog seems to have stopped updating: root@CydStorage:/var/log# tail syslog Mar 11 12:27:01 CydStorage crond[1723]: exit status 2 from user root /usr/lib/sa/sa1 1 1 &> /dev/null Mar 11 12:28:01 CydStorage crond[1723]: exit status 2 from user root /usr/lib/sa/sa1 1 1 &> /dev/null Mar 11 12:29:01 CydStorage crond[1723]: exit status 2 from user root /usr/lib/sa/sa1 1 1 &> /dev/null Mar 11 12:30:01 CydStorage crond[1723]: exit status 2 from user root /usr/lib/sa/sa1 1 1 &> /dev/null Mar 11 12:31:01 CydStorage crond[1723]: exit status 2 from user root /usr/lib/sa/sa1 1 1 &> /dev/null Mar 11 12:32:01 CydStorage crond[1723]: exit status 2 from user root /usr/lib/sa/sa1 1 1 &> /dev/null Mar 11 12:33:01 CydStorage crond[1723]: exit status 2 from user root /usr/lib/sa/sa1 1 1 &> /dev/null Mar 11 12:34:01 CydStorage crond[1723]: exit status 2 from user root /usr/lib/sa/sa1 1 1 &> /dev/null Mar 11 12:35:01 CydStorage crond[1723]: exit status 2 from user root /usr/lib/sa/sa1 1 1 &> /dev/null Mar 11 1 root@CydStorage:/var/log# I had noticed this when looking via the GUI at syslog so confirmed via command line. I am not sure what's happened here, or if anyone else has experienced this. Is there a way to get it started again, or do I need to reboot? Here are the permissions if it matters: root@CydStorage:/var/log# ls -al syslog* -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 204800 Mar 17 19:40 syslog -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1128164 Mar 9 04:40 syslog.1

Okay.... I hate when I do this, but it appears I am an idiot. When filling in the defect bug report I started to explain the situation and realized that at least some of the data is actually on the cache drive. I got mixed up as I had been looking in the complete folder from SAB/SB, and NOT in the actual TV folder in the cache drive. Looking through the folders there is at least a good chunk of the files there. I am going to need to dig into this further before I bother filing a bug as it may just be a PEBCAK error.

Do you mean show or episode? If you're constraining a show that's really too restrictive. An episode is fine -- it's in fact a good idea to have the full episode on a single disk ... same as for a movie ... so only one disk needs to spin up to watch that episode/movie. You can completely eliminate the issue you had by a combination of split level and min free space ... as long as the min free space is larger than any episode could be, the copy will succeed for any episode; and when the next episode needs to be written, it will go on a different disk if the min free is no longer available. I agree, however, that it's a bug that the mover isn't leaving the unsuccessfully copied file on the cache. I suspect this is related to the user share copy issue, since the result is the same (zero length files). Prior to this I had never thought constraining a show was too restrictive. It just seemed like good housekeeping. It just goes against my ordered mentality to let episodes go wherever and have a single show span a bunch of disks. I guess I will have to pay better attention to how I have things structured (though I did a full clean-up 6 months ago). Hopefully Tom & team can fix the mover issue though to minimize the impact if this happens again.

I do have multiple disks in the share, however have the split set up so that any given show is constrained to a single disk. Even if I took this one level lower I still would have been screwed as it was part way through the season, so even if I split at a lower level I still would have had the same issue. I have several other disks with free space, but given the way the data is stored they are only helping now as I manually move data around. I am reading you comments and assuming that split levels is the only way to manage this, which I don't see helping for the reasons above. Is there something above and beyond that that you are referring to? As to kaiguy's question It looks like it's been roughly 8-10 days. I am not even sure if the log is showing me all the files/folders in question so I am going to have to go through each active show and investigate. Definitely a pain in the ass, but could be worse. I definitely think the mover script should leave the files alone if they don't successfully copy. This would have at least saved me a bunch of headaches.

I was looking at my array when I noticed one of my disks was 100% used, and when I realized it was one of the disks dedicated to TV shows I got concerned and started looking in the latest season folders and noticed that some of the shows are zero byte file sizes because the disk was full. I use a cache disk, so was hopeful that the episodes would still be stored in cache as the copy would have failed, however, it is empty as well, so I am guessing that even though there was zero space, UnRAID still thinks that it successfully copied the files over. Is it just me, or does this seems like it should be a bug? Ideally I would have hoped it would have kept the file on the cache drive as I don't believe the copy should have been successful. When I look at my syslog sure enough I see the following: Mar 10 03:45:56 CydStorage logger: rsync error: error in file IO (code 11) at receiver.c(389) [receiver=3.1.0] (Errors) Mar 10 03:45:56 CydStorage logger: ./TV/Justified/Season 6/Justified S06E07 - The Hunt.mkv Mar 10 03:45:56 CydStorage logger: >f.stpog... TV/Justified/Season 6/Justified S06E07 - The Hunt.mkv Mar 10 03:45:56 CydStorage shfs/user0: shfs_write: write: (28) No space left on device Mar 10 03:45:56 CydStorage shfs/user0: shfs_write: write: (28) No space left on device Mar 10 03:46:09 CydStorage logger: rsync: write failed on "/mnt/user0/TV/Justified/Season 6/Justified S06E07 - The Hunt.mkv": No space left on device (28) (Minor Issues) So, a couple of points.... 1) If it failed to copy, why does it get wiped off of the cache drive? 2) This seems like something that a notification should pop up for, but when I log into the GUI I only get green notification boxes telling me life is good. This seems like a pretty big oversight, and am not sure if it's always been this way, or if something has changed, but thought it should be raised. I have to redo 8-10 days of TV shows to those folders, but it could have been much worse.

I have a single WD Red 6TB parity drive in my 4224. I've not had any issues. Everything else is 3/4TB drives though.

It might also be useful to be able to prioritize containers to start. For example, if you have MariaDB and either XBMC or KODI it would make sense to have the MariaDB start first before the other kicked off. It does seem to work okay now with everything auto-starting, but this would be a nice feature to have as Docker uses get more complex.

This seems similar to what I noticed when rebuilding my docker containers. In b12 Chrome would open up a separate window that would show the download progress of the container(s) and metadata, whereas with b14 everything seems to happen in the main GUI page and it just "hangs" with the page working to refresh. Once the container was downloaded the page refreshed to show all that was downloaded and completed. It would be far better to show actual progress so that you know something is happening and it's being successful vs. having a window just sort of hang there until complete. I seem to recall that this issue has already been brought to the attention of Limetech and they said the issue would be addressed. Good to hear. I must have missed that.

This seems similar to what I noticed when rebuilding my docker containers. In b12 Chrome would open up a separate window that would show the download progress of the container(s) and metadata, whereas with b14 everything seems to happen in the main GUI page and it just "hangs" with the page working to refresh. Once the container was downloaded the page refreshed to show all that was downloaded and completed. It would be far better to show actual progress so that you know something is happening and it's being successful vs. having a window just sort of hang there until complete.

I can't comment directly on your question, but thought I would offer up my suggestion to a similar situation. I have Plex running on my UnRAID server and just set my parents up with a Plex client. I had them running XBMC with an external drive, but got tired of having to refresh the data. With Plex they can see/access everything that I have on my UnRAID server without me having to do anything. If you are going to take this approach I would suggest either a Windows or Android as there can be a wide variation in the clients, and ones like Roku outright suck. The nice thing about this solution is you can pick up a good Android client for $100. Again, not an answer to your specific question, but the easiest/most cost effective solution I found. The only caveat is they are now using bandwidth for everything they watch (as it's streaming from your server). This hasn't been a problem yet for me, but they have an option of paying an extra $10/month for unlimited downloads, which we may do if it comes to it. It's still a pretty cheap solution.

At this point, unless you are 100% sure you are not going to be affected by the b13 issue you should just wait for b14. Why risk the cache drive issue if you don't need to? It's not like b12 is on a countdown and will explode if you don't get off it in the next 24 hours. A bit more patience seems like a better course than having to post another "opps, me too" entry in this thread. Since b13 was pulled from the download site I am not clear why you can still upgrade via the GUI. You would think it would make sense to remove this feature as well for those who don't read 10+ pages of a thread befor hitting 'Update'.

That is definitely cheaper than I was seeing it for, so thanks for clearing it up. I will look into that card.

Thanks, but I am hoping to avoid spending $300 per card. I was hoping for $100-$150 range if possible. With trying to update two servers I am trying to keep the cost reasonable.

I know this isn't related to UnRAID, but I recognize there are a number of highly technical people here so thought I would get input. I am looking for a good, low cost 4 port RAID card that will support RAID 5/10 and is supported on Windows Server 2012 R2. I will be booting off a SSD and will be creating the RAID array for VM storage. I have an existing 3WARE 9650SE-4LPML card, but the drivers don't seem to work correctly (array doesn't appear on boot and I need to reload the driver - it also throws up tons of event log errors). I am actually looking at building two servers so want a low cost card as I am buying two of them. I will be attaching 4 SATA disks and am fine with direct SATA or 8087 breakout cables as I have them handy. Does anyone have some suggestions?

I see what you're getting at. Will address when I get to the office. Hey Jonp I see you added this to the OP, but don't see any reference to the apcupsd piece (you need to remove from 12 before upgrading to 13). This should likely be noted as well to save people headaches.

Legalities aside, the cost of the license is minimal, and if you are going to use UnRAID I think it's reasonable to ensure that the funding goes to LT directly to help continue growth of the company and product. If you bought a $60 license and no longer require it then fine, put it aside and trust that you likely got value for the cost. Let the new people buy and support UnRAID. This is one of the reasons these licenses should not be forever upgradable without additional cost - in my opinion anyways.

I have two of these cards and all my HDs are attached to them. I've not had any issues under UnRAID, and have been able to boot into Xen without issue. I had built Xen based VMs on an earlier build, but since everything moved to Docker there is no point to VMs for me, so I have not tested recently. I spent several months booting into Xen mode due to some hard drive issues.. not had a problem. I am running 1812 firmware. I don't know what all you have configured, but if you try a virgin setup do you get any different results?

Not in a hurry but good to know! Hmmm... I took BRiT's posting as a 'tongue-in-cheek' comment rather than an authoritative dissemination of information. Likely accurate. No one ever seems to really know what's going on - around here it's always just a safe bet to assume you are going to have to wait longer.

If you used screen then the preclear process is still running and you can connect with screen -r. However if you just started the preclear from putty without using screen then once you terminated the putty session you killed your preclear process and will have to start over.

What about the whole new and shiny thing, when you scrap it to be on your well-known desktop? I'm fine with the default desktop of W7 without having to "get it to do something". Of course, once you reestablish the desktop, an inexperienced user won't be able to tell you what is running under the hood. Again, this was for 70+ year old parents. For me I was fine with a mix of metro/desktop, though prefer the 8.1 implementation. However there is nothing wrong with taking something new, keeping the aspects that are useful to you and modifying those that are not. People can always find something to bitch about, but most of it just seems to be so they can hear their own voice (or read their own words).

What about the whole new and shiny thing, when you scrap it to be on your well-known desktop? I'm fine with the default desktop of W7 without having to "get it to do something". Of course, once you reestablish the desktop, an inexperienced user won't be able to tell you what is running under the hood. So, what is the real benefit apart from the "stellar look"? M$ gets you closer to their appstore? Eats up more resources? For me here are the benefits: - Continuum - I use a Surface Pro so the switch back/forth between keyboard/mouse and touch will be handy - XBOX integration - limited value as it stands, but definitely of interest - Cortana - has the potential to change how you interact with your PC - Universal Apps - being able to run the same app on your phone, pc and xbox (potentially anyways). - Virtual Desktops There will likely be more, but this is a good start. As for eating up resources, maybe it does, but who cares? I am not trying to run this on a Pentium Pro with 1GB of memory. I am a tech enthusiast who is willing to buy hardware that will meet my requirements and ensure a reasonable performance. There are lots of benefits of moving forward for those who are not stuck in the past.

I have a mix of WD Greens and Reds and all my movies are 1080p. I've never had an issue, even with multiple streams from the same disk. I also often have Plex streams out to family/friends without issue. Nowadays I would buy Reds just because they are better NAS drives, but I've never had an issue with my Greens either.