Velodo

I've been using 3 SSDs in my cache pool which is set to run the equivalent of RAID5, so I'm aware it can be fast. However, with all the issues surrounding btrfs I'm not even really comfortable with just my appdata and VMs on there, but I haven't had issues so far. I really wouldn't trust my important data on a ~60TB btrfs pool at this point in time... maybe once btrfs matures some more. Hence, why I want zfs.. I basically need 60-80TB of fast, reliable storage right now for non media + 200TB of whatever storage for media. ZFS snapshots and scrubbing will just be a nice bonus.

All very good points, thanks for taking the time to answer! I can't help but wonder how many people will make the switch to Unraid from Freenas if zfs gets implemented. When I tried out Freenas years ago before purchasing Unraid it was certainly decent, but Unraid was way ahead when it comes to all the plugins, VMs, and Docker. Really glad I made the switch before it was too late, but as my data has grown my needs for many TB of faster storage than my Unraid pool can muster has also grown. I'm really hoping zfs will be the answer to that.

I'm excited to see the possibility of zfs! Assuming this does get added, is likely to be added to this release or a future release? I know giving exact timelines is impossible, but I've been planning an upgrade and part of that will include a smaller zfs pool that will be always spun up with everything except large media files, then a large unraid pool with the bulk of my media which will keep the drives spun down when possible to save on electricity. If official implementation is a ways out yet I might set it up with the zfs plugin and trying to deal with importing it later, but starting off with native support would probably be better.

I love how easy the initial setup was, I was up and running in no time, and adding some of the more advanced stuff later was also pretty easy. I would like to see an official implementation of zfs. I know it's not really going with the whole theme of Unraid, but having the option would be very nice as I find the performance on the array a little lacking from time to time (but overall still acceptable for my current needs). Bonus points if you can have multiple arrays set up with different fs structures.

I just did a quick test before going to work, I can do some more once I get back, but it looks like I'm getting the same results as before. I can ping the container, but no webui and sonarr/radarr can't access it.

As far as I can tell the VPN and torrent client still work great, so I think the VPN settings are all correct. Ah.. I was afraid you were going to say something like that. Since I have everything working great as is now I'll probably leave it alone, but once your changes are ready I'll be happy to test them out to see if it helps with this!

Hey Binhex, I've been using quite a few of your containers for a couple of years now without any trouble up until now (thank you for the awesome containers and support!) Recently I decided to set up all of my rTorrent containers to use a VPN.. I know after 2 years it's long overdue but I exclusively use private trackers so it wasn't something I really worried about too much. I just want to note that I did get them up and running, but I start running into a lot of trouble when I don't use the Bridged network type. What I really want to use is use br0: Custom so I can set different IPs for all of the containers, but when I do that for rTorrent I can't access the webUI. I did however notice that the torrents will all start and show up as seeding according to the trackers I'm seeding content on. I can also ping the container from a different computer on my network, just can't connect to the webui or with Sonarr/Radarr. Setting the network type to bridged allows me to connect to the webUI just fine, however, I still have issues with Sonarr and Radarr not being able to connect if they are on br0, so I have to set those to the bridged adapter as well. Before when I had the VPN option turned off on all of my rTorrent containers everything was working perfectly together on the br0 adapter. I have already tried enabling iptable_mangle since you mentioned it for a similar issue in your Q&A, but it didn't seem to help. Do you have any insight as to what is going on here and how I can start using br0 with custom IPs for all of my containers again, or if it is even possible?