jeremyn

I saw that in the page, but since I'm running a newer OS than MacOS 10.11.4 (I'm running 10.14.6), I didn't try it. But as it turns out, I just looked and I already had that in my numb.conf file.

Thank you for the link and info, I reconfigured my SMB share with these settings, (customizing to my share paths as needed) and I'm sad to report zero difference. It takes about 5 - 30 seconds just to start copying each file.

I just tried another folder with a large but still reasonable number of files (under 10,000) and not a lot of data. 184 days to copy 8,887 files and only 47.31 GB over SMB to my Unraid server. The same folder to a 14 year old MacPro running AFP took a few min. Seriously WTF.

Has anyone managed to make any headway here? My experience with larges numbers of files over SMB to or from a Mac is bordering on useless, especially since they dropped AFP (which actually handles large numbers of files quite well). I attempted to copy my large iPhoto library with hundreds of thousands of files and it said it would take several weeks. It's only a couple of TB. And I'm beginning to regret going with Unraid. If I had a 2nd server to copy my 250TB of stuff over to temporarily, I'd be switching. But alas, I don't so I'm trying to figure this out. I tried to get AFP/Netatalk working via Docker, but that's over my head and unfortunately I wasn't able to get any help on these forums. Feeling stuck.

With regards to the performance of AFP/Netatalk vs SMB. I'm shocked how much better the overall experience of AFP is compared to SMB. I'm connected to my server via 10Gb ethernet, and the throughput of a single transaction (copying a large single file for example) once established, is slightly faster on SMB, but everything else is SO laggy on SMB. Specifically opening directories, or working with a lot of small files. I just did a test: I tried copying a single steam game with 6,660 files inside total file size 37GB from internal SSD to SMB share and AFP share. The SMB estimate was 3 days (each file takes about 20 sec to get started, then goes relatively fast, rinse-repeat 6,600 times). AFP was able to copy the same folder from the same source to the same destination in 14 min.

I did that, but I can't seem to translate that over to how the netatalk docker works. But again, most of this is way over my head. And volume mapping isn't my biggest problem, it's permissions. I need to figure out how to honor a login and password. As it sits, only guest works and it's wide open.

Yes I have quite a few Dockers.

Because I couldn't figure out any other way to do it.

Nobody interested huh? I guess I was wrong about #1, and I'm the only person left that cares about AFP. I really wish I understood the authentication stuff better and I'd do this myself.

I'm a straight up newbie at creating Docker containers. However, I got frustrated at the removal of AFP from Unraid so after some hours of banging my head against the wall I was able to create an insanely basic netatalk docker for Unraid. (Docker experts could have created this in less than a minute, but like I said, I'm a total newbie and it took me a while to figure all this out). I don't want to publish it to CA, since it's about as simplistic as you can get, and it's completely insecure in its current form. This is because I could not figure out how to set up or pass through authentication from Unraid. That kind of thing is way over my head. I have my reasons why I need AFP over SMB, please don't argue I need to move on. I'm aware it's depreciated by both Apple and unraid. But I have reasons to use it on my unraid server. The reason for this post is three fold: 1) I know I'm not the only person to miss AFP in Unraid. So to those of you wondering if it's possible to get it working again, I can confirm it is. 2) I would love to make this Docker Container more secure, and I need help. 3) I'd love for somebody to take this over and even create a webUI for it. Hey I can dream! Rather than posting a completely insecure Docker to Community Applications, I'm posting the Docker Container XML here so people can make suggestions on how to make it more secure. Specifically how to pass the SMB and/or NFS user/group/folder permissions over to AFP. The irony is that this has all been figured out for years but was purged from unraid. So maybe its as simple as somebody posting how unraid integrated these in the past. Attached is the XML that will configure a docker that enables AFP access with full read/write access your mnt/user root to guest AFP users. (I told you it was insecure!) What I've learned so far, adding the command "--volume /mnt/user/appdata/netatalk/afp.conf:/etc/afp.conf" to Extra Parameters will override the default afp.conf with a custom afp.conf you can create in /appdata/netatalk And I was able to restrict users and do some other things in there, but I could never figure out how to properly authenticate, either to a password in the clear in that file, or better to the Unraid user name and password. The netatalk docker also has some authentication functionality, but I could not seem to figure out how to get that to work either. Please help. netatalk.xml

Thank you for that info. That's reassuring there'll be a path forward for us. I have no desire to scrap my unraid server, and I really don't want to be stuck with an old version years from now. <off topic tangent> Yeah, there's no way in #^& I'm moving away from DVD Studio Pro. As somebody who's been doing DVD authoring since 1997, and have thousands of titles under my belt, I can say without hesitation, there's no better authoring program than DVD Studio Pro and I've used them all. Scenarist is the only other "Hollywood grade / replication ready" authoring software and due to its lack of a useful abstraction layer, it would literally take me 2 - 4 times longer to author a the kind of complex titles we create. I believe my company is probably the last company in the world offering boutique and unique DVD and Blu-ray features and menus in our authoring, no cookie cutter crap. Even Hollywood is cookie cutter-ing most of their titles now. </off topic tangent>

I understand, and agree, most of my hardware is spanking new. And for most people they should, of course, be running current hardware and software. But over 50% of my income comes from DVD Authoring, and the last version of Mac OS that reliably runs DVD Studio Pro is 10.6.8. And working locally is a massive headache with content and resources being processed on new and old machines (and the entire reason I'm using a server). And while 10.6.8 supports SMB there's a massive bug. If you "Move" data or do anything similar, the OS completes the task instantly without actually doing the move and then it deletes the source. I lost several projects in a single move action. (Thank heavens for backups, though they were a bit out of date). Also AFP is much more reliable when there's resource fork data, which again is more common in older apps and MacOS's. I'm not asking to enable it by default or even make it visible by default. But keep it around for those of us that need it. And I guess that begs the question, can I add that kind of low level driver back in myself if it gets removed? I'm not familiar with that level of customization.

> AFP support has been removed. Please don't do this! I have multiple older Macs that connect (this is required due to the work I do and the need to support OLD apps that only run on older Macs running older MacOS versions), and SMB has serious bugs (data loss level of bugs) on these older machines. AFP support is THE biggest reason I'm super happy to have gone with Unraid. Totally understandable to hide it for the majority of users, but don't remove it completely.

Thank you for the detailed reply. I suspected the answer would be inline with what you said, but I appreciate the confirmation.

I won a 45 Drives Storinator last year and I'm finally starting to build up enough of a drive supply to start contemplating bringing it online. I'm currently leaning toward unRAID but I'm concerned about speed. I'll be doing a lot of things with this including 8K video editing over 10Gb ethernet, also plex server and various data hoarding. My biggest concern with unRAID is speed. I love the concept behind it and I think it's probably the overall right choice for me and the mix of drives I'll be installing. In an effort to get the speeds I need to do two things, one is standard, and the other is very non-standard and maybe not even supported, which is why I'm here asking. First speed up: Probably a 1 or 2TB SSD cache drive, pretty standard. Second: I want to add the spinning disks in as pairs of stripedRAID 0, because in my mind this would roughly double the throughput. Yes, I'm fully aware this increases the risk of data failure. But I'll have cloud backups of the entire thing (thank you Google Fiber!), so it's not a huge concern. Here's my configuration I'm thinking about... Performance Volume (8K video editing) would need to be two RAID 0 (total of 4 drives) pairs for in order to make sure my parity volume was big enough to cover the failure of one of my 16TB raid 0 data "drives". By doing raid 0 parity I double the likelihood of parity failure so i'm basically back to RAID 5-ish safety, again I'm okay with this. Data Hoarding Volume: Then a more 2nd standard unRaid configuration for my data hoarding and plex server, and I'll be putting fairly random drives into this set with a parity drive large enough to cover them. But still in the same enclosure. Do I need VM for this? An alternative configuration would be a standard stripped RAID 6 for my high performance volume. And an 2nd unRaid configuration for data hoarding. What's possible? Thoughts? Sorry if this has been asked, I did searches but didn't find anything...