Frank1940

I set a share to private, created a user set read/write permissions to that share. But on my windows 7 PC when i try to navigate to that share it's saying I don't have access when i put the user name and password. Did I miss anything? Here is a explanation of what is happening from LimeTech:

I'm pretty sure this is what you are looking for. https://lime-technology.com/forum/index.php?topic=26412.msg231122#msg231122 Perhaps LimeTech should put this information into the user manual(s) so that it is more easily found. The explanation in the link explains the problem, the why-and-how, and the solution in a few lines. The way Samba handles this whole user name/password thing is extremely convoluted and I have never seen a clearer explanation about it in any place else!

Dynamix System Button plugin did not reboot my Test Bed server to install version 6.3 rc4 (to upgrade from 6.3 rc3). It only stopped the array. (I waited until the counter had reached over 187 before I went back to the GUI which was fully functional at the point.) I rebooted the server using 'Reboot' button on the 'Array Operation' tab on the 'Main' page. EDIT: I can confirm that the same behavior persists with 6.3.0 rc4. After I clicked the Dynamix System Button's icon, selected 'Reboot', and confirmed that I want to reboot, the reboot screen appeared and the counter started running. I waited until it hit 108. At that point, I called back up the GUI and it showed that the array had stopped but nothing happened after that. (I was watching the monitor connected to the server!) I then left the array stopped and rebooted with the 'Reboot' button on the 'Array Operation' tab. The counter never got beyond '0'. And I could see the start of the reboot sequence on the monitor. The reboot completed normally!

In order to run the Linux version, I have to create a Docker. Not done that before, I'm not a Linux Admin and I don't play one on TV, so not chuffed about that option... Thoughts? Have you tried 'right-clicking' on the app and selecting 'Run As Administrator'. (I suggest this because the app 'says' it is doing a 'move' operation which implies (to me) a copy-and-delete.)

Here is an introductory thread that will point you to several other resources to assist you through this problem. You are probably one of the folks who had to reformat their Flash Drives and install the new version. DON'T PANIC. If you follow the directions, you will not lose your configuration settings. https://lime-technology.com/forum/index.php?topic=41003.0 I will tell you right now, none of your plugins will work so be prepared for that.

Are you having any problems copying files using Windows Explorer? If not, it sounds like the problem is within the application or its settings. Have you checked with the forums for the product?

It does seem that having one computer always being the Master Browser seems to solve a lot of issues (Plus, I suspect that MS has made some changes to SMB again in the Win 10 version with the LINUX SMB team playing catch-up. With the auto update situation and the lack of information of what those updates contain, Win10 is black hole. An additional confusion factor is that there three major versions of Win 10--- Home, College, and corporate. And I suspect that the security protocols for each one is a bit different...)

It is true that rc3 offers direct reboot/shutdown, but it doesn't replace completely the functionality of system buttons, which offers the buttons in the header (=all pages). I need to make an update to system buttons though to make it compatible with 6.3.0-rc3. SUPER!!!

It was mentioned in another thread that System Buttons is not needed in 6.3 as it's included in the normal Shutdown/Reboot now. Probably is true, but I sure love those buttons up there all of the time ready for use from any screen/tab!

System Buttons does not work with version 6.3.0 rc3. It simply hangs. If you use the buttons on the "Main", "Array Operation" tab, things work as they should. I have attached the Diagnostics file and the "still_mounted" file (renamed to still_mounted.txt to upload) as it has the same date-time stamp. EDIT: This may have been broken in version 6.3.0 rc2 as I did not attempt to use it until I was doing the upgrades. rose-diagnostics-20160923-1510.zip still_mounted.txt

Manually check for plugin updates, you're probably attempting to install an outdated release. Thanks! that was the problem.

Got the following this morning updating both servers to the latest version: plugin: updating: dynamix.bleeding.edge.plg plugin: downloading: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/bergware/dynamix/master/archive/dynamix.bleeding.edge.txz ... done plugin: bad file MD5: /boot/config/plugins/dynamix.bleeding.edge/dynamix.bleeding.edge.txz Any suggestions?

WOW!!! Please post up details of what your original configuration was that did not work. Than post up what you changed it to that did work.

I believe JoeL explained the current situation pretty well in this post regarding his script: https://lime-technology.com/forum/index.php?topic=13054.msg464653#msg464653 However, he has not been able to provide proper support for his script for some time because of other commitments on his Time (life!). Apparently, the need to patch the script developed somewhere in the 6.2 beta releases. For versions earlier than that, you use the original script. For later versions, you will have to patch. You may realize that there is also a plugin to do preclear and that plugin can utilize JoeL's script. And his script has to be patched for the version of unRAID that is installed on the server. (If you are referring to some issues with the plugin or plugin/script combination, let's not cluttered up this thread with any discussion on those types of issues!)

First thing, I would suggest is to make your unRAID server the Master Browser. You can do this by going to 'Settings' >> 'SMB' >> 'Workgroup Settings' and set "Local master browser:" to 'Yes'. (NOTE: This works best if you unRAID server is on 24/7.) If you have already done this (or if you are doing for the first time), install the 'Dynamix Local Master' plugin. This will allow you to quickly determine which of the many SMB enabled devices on your network has 'won' the election to become your Master Browser. You can find the plugin here: http://lime-technology.com/forum/index.php?topic=36543.0 I assume that you have cleared all of the credentials by using the Credential Manager found in the Control Panel. Next thing to check is that the workgroup name is identical on all of the computers. Capitalization is significant as Linux uses it and Windows ignores it. In the olden days, all Windows file names were CAPITAL letters and I would suggest using all CAPS if nothing seems to solve the problem. I am not sure how SMB handles this issue. If you unRAID server is having problems with becoming the Master Browser, post back and I will give you instructions that will guarantee that it will always win the election! (The problem is that MS has always biased the election process by making it more likely that later release of the Windows OS will win the election. The second problem is that if a Master Browser is quickly found during the boot process, the booting computer may decide to make itself the Master Browser and you can end up with two of them on the same network--- Not a good situation. It seems by having the same computer always being the Master Browser solves this problem for most people.) One more comment. Win 10 seems to have caused some problems by itself. The automatic (and frequent) updating of the OS means that the user is unaware of those updates. Some of these updates seem to be security related and they may cause issues with SMB access. Plus, Win 10 has (at least) three major versions and the security models are different for each one. This makes troubleshooting on this end difficult. Plus, the folks that maintain the SMB module are always playing catchup in dealing with these changes!

What are you trying to accomplish? You should have a strong password assigned to your root account if you have had security issues on the LAN side. But the Telnet access (and you should have shut straight Telnet down and be using SSH) and the GUI are administrator logins and are to be used only for administrative functions. Whenever you are using the GUI, you have full administrator (or root) privileges on the server and you should only be logging if you are intending to use them. You should 'feel' like you are the root user and realize exactly what you can do. And you should be attempting to deny any other users from having access to either of these interfaces. As a matter of fact, you will find out that root is not allowed to log into a a user share on SMB (and I would presume NFS). This was done for security reasons. A big security hole still to be plugged is the use of http for the GUI. Conversion to https is on the drawing boards and should be coming soon.

YES! That is a real positive. It is so much quicker than tabbing through the attributes pages for each drive. (I never realized it existed until Squid asked to have it restored! So thanks, Squid!)

Version 6.2 requires that the original preclear script be modified to work properly. Se here for instructions: http://lime-technology.com/forum/index.php?topic=13054.msg464653#msg464653 Hope this helps!

You are correct about Backblaze but they are the only source that anyone (apparently) has found that gives any indication of failure rates of hard drives over an extended period of time. (Most of the Manufacturer's reliability data is a large number of drives over a fairly short period of time to count the number of failures. 1000 disks for a 1000 hours with one failure = 1 failure per million hours of operation!) If anything (I feel), Backblaze 'failure' rates are on the high side. If we could somehow get enough data from unRAID users, I would suspect that the annual failure rate of all hard drives is under 2%. (But even I would be hard pressed to figure out how many disks of mine have failed and when...) That is not to say that someone could not have purchased six of their ten hard drives from a lot of disks with a exceptionally high failure rate. (Which is why it is better to purchase and add disks over a period of time rather than making a single purchase to completely fill an array. By the way, this is what Backblaze does not do because they want to get the advantage of a high bulk purchase discount.) By the way, I seem to recall that Backblaze actually runs their servers with failed disks in them (Their parity/redundancy scheme must be able to handle multiple failed disks.) and change out several disks at the same time. And apparently, it is like RAID 5 in that all of the disks have to be the same size, so they will evaluate the point at which and which server they will remove from service so they can add a replacement server with a larger storage capacity. I really don't want to be one who says that dual parity should not be used or that it is an absolute necessity. My personal feeling is that is you have eight of less data drives, it will provide very little risk reduction of data loss. Between eight and say twelve, it may have some benefit. With more than about twelve drives, the benefit is substantial. BUT a careless, happy-go-lucky unRAID administrator will never be out of danger. Without careful observation of the warning signs, data loss is a certainty regardless of the number of disk failures that the system will tolerate before data loss...

Now that version 6.2 is offering the choice of dual parity, many of you will be facing a decision as to whether to implement dual parity or remain with single parity. It might seem to be a 'no-brainer' to move to dual parity but there is considerable expense involved with that move as most of you will realize! At that point, you might well be wondering what the risk/benefit truly is. Finding data on the the failure rates of hard drives is rather difficult to come by. Most manufacturers consider it to be highly confidential information as most of them have had one or more drive models which have had high failure rates as reported by users in their reviews. Plus, true failure-rate data can only become available about the time that the drive is about to be discontinued. About the only source of information comes from Backblaze which issues an annual report of the failures of hard drives in their arrays. You can find the latest report here: https://www.backblaze.com/blog/hard-drive-reliability-stats-q1-2016/ They are using 'consumer' type hard drives in their arrays rather than 'server' class drives so that is a plus. But, on the flip side, they really pack the drives in tight and they are spun up and in use 24/7/365 so they are operating in the worst possible environment. So I would surmise that their failure rates are much higher than would be expected on most unRAID servers where the drives are allowed to be spun down and the temperatures are probably more moderate. I decided to build a spread sheet to calculate the probability of drive failure(s) in a one month period. I picked one month because most diligent users are running monthly parity checks and will receive a report on the health of their arrays at least that often. (Of course, with ver 6.2 and later, the concerned user should be setting up Notifications to alert them to problems on a more frequent basis! But that is another story...) I have attached three tables of failure probabilities --- 11%, 5% and 2%. You can pick the one that best suits your risk toleration factor. You will also note that I constructed the table for the number of DATA drives NOT the total number of drives in the array. Adding a second parity drive to an existing array actually increases the probability of given number of drives failing in the same time period! The red columns are the probability of actual data loss while the black columns are the probability of having a failure where the data is recoverable. Now, as to what the numbers mean. A probability of .000104 means that you have (approximately) 1 chance in 10,000 of having that number of drives failing in a one month period. A probability of .012448 means you have a (approximately) 1 chance in 100 of having that number of drives fail in a one month period. Do be a bit careful in using statistics. If you had a drive fail this month, the probability of a drive failing next month are exactly the same as they were for this month. However, the probability of a drive failing next month and another one the month after that are much, much higher. What seems to be common sense is often mathematically untrue! Now, how to make a bit of sense of your risk. Let's look at another potential source of data loss-- a house fire. One source that I found indicated that the probability (for the USA) of having a fire in your house in the next month was .000264 (Approximately 3 in 1,000) and having the house declared a total loss was .0000278 (Approximately 3 in 10,000). If you look at the probability tables for dual parity, you are more likely to lose your data in a house fire then having a three disc failure on your array! If you consider that dual parity is a absolute necessity, do you have a plan in place for off-site backup of your data? Parity_Failure_Probabilities11%.pdf Parity_Failure_Probabilities5%.pdf Parity_Failure_Probabilities2%.pdf Here is a link with Backblaze data for the 3rd Quarter of 2016: https://www.backblaze.com/blog/hard-drive-failure-rates-q3-2016/

You guys leave me sleepless... The good news: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/bergware/dynamix/master/unRAIDv6/dynamix.bleeding.edge.plg This is version 2016.09.16 and works with unRAID 6.2 stable. Copy & paste the URL above into the install box of plugin manager. Did the upgrade on my Test Bed server. Everything seems to be working. BTW, I did NOT have to reboot to get it working. Is this truly necessary or it is a hold-over from the earlier versions?

Nope and that fixed it. It appears to be functioning at this point. I even checked to make sure that the write speed part works and it does. I am assuming that big notification blocks will now be 'gone' if I retain the 'Summarized' setting. GOOD SHOW!!! After a while, they get in the way even on a 2560X1600 display!

The new version fixed that part. Now, I don't see the buttons at the bottom of the banner. (Screen shot attached.) I have attached another diagnostic file... Oh, the joys of making nine hundred plugins all work together! EDIT: Just checked my email and found this: Event: Fix Common Problems Subject: Warnings have been found with your server. Description: Investigate at Settings / User Utilities / Fix Common Problems Importance: warning **** The plugin dynamix.bleeding.edge.plg is not known to Community Applications and is possibly incompatible with your server **** rose-diagnostics-20160915-0803.zip

When installing the plugin it forcibly overwrites the existing files, hence my recommendation to reboot the server afterwards to get proper operation. Perhaps in your case it was a bit too much? Not quite sure what you mean here. I did do a second reboot but the situation was still the same--- No GUI and no shares. Sorry I misread your message, and overlooked the rebooting part. Sounds like the unpacking and installation had some issue (USB stick?). If you haven't installed version 2016.09.14a yet, you can upgrade and see if it works this time. Being a glutton for punishment, I did the plugin install again. Same result. I have attached the diagnostics file (20160914-1755) after the reboot of the install of bleeding edge plugin and the file (20160914-1808) after I ripped the new plugin out. Hopefully, these might provide a clue as to what is happening... rose-diagnostics-20160914-1755.zip rose-diagnostics-20160914-1808.zip

When installing the plugin it forcibly overwrites the existing files, hence my recommendation to reboot the server afterwards to get proper operation. Perhaps in your case it was a bit too much? Not quite sure what you mean here. I did do a second reboot but the situation was still the same--- No GUI and no shares.