Lavoslav

Docker tab, "Container size" button on the bottom shows alot. Writable column is the data the app has written into the image. Misconfigured containers that download into docker.img itself will have that column rather large. I don't know of any other way to see it. Try to catch it in the act before it moves content out from docker.img? Edit: For ARR stack, maby transcoding directory is not set outside, anything that downloads - download directory, etc...

Everything went without any issues. Since I rarelywent above 15ish % CPU usage at max when working it "hard", usually it was at arround at 3-7%, I also swapped from custom built i9-13900k to a Lenovo P520 with Xeon W-2223. Beefed up to 80Gb ECC RAM too. UnRaid did not care at all about the hardware swap. Booted on 1st attempt.

I've swapped drives, expanded and shrinked array before while I had all xfs formated drives and no pool except cache pool so I know how it goes in that case and it's as simple as New config with Preserve current assignments, shuffle the config, add drives, remove drives, etc. and voilà. Magic happens over night with minimal input from my part... Now I'm using a both array and a zfs pool and I'm not sure how it goes in this case. This is what I have right now: Array: parity (sdb) disks 1-2-3 (sdi,sdd,sdc) as xfs and disk 4 (sde) as zfs Pool: 3 disks as ZFS (sdf, sdg, sdh): I want to remove disks 2, 3 and 4 from the array. I've already moved all the data to disk 1 (sdi) in array. I understand parity will have to be rebuilt, not a problem, data from array is duplicated on a spare NAS while parity rebuild happens, just in case. I do not have enough HDD space to duplicate data from zfs pool though so I'm wondering. If stop the array and do "New Configuration>Preserve current assignments", remove disks 2,3,4 from array and pull them out of the machine will zfs pool be affected since sdd, sdc and sde disks will no longer be in the server? Do I have to do anything at all, like importing zfs pool or similar (I've no aidea how to do it), or is it all automatic like it was before when I did it with no pool and only xfs array?

Not in particular, but since I know diddly-squat about DHT protocol and how bitmagnet and my download container communicate with each other I was wondering do I need to add my tracker instance to each torrent in my downloader to speed up things along or is it fine as it is.

Will qBittorrent docker find this container by itself as a DHT tracker or do I have to add it manually somehow?

Issue with timestamps on FSM saves: Saves timestamped -2 hours in FSM GUI. Unraid has time and date set up correctly for my locale (UTC +1) e.g. local time is 11:00AM (correct time) save time is 9:00AM (wrong, should be same as above) Any pointers?

If it's the same thing that I had with my CPU that's exactly it. It was not even a matter of IF the machine will crash but how long will it take to crash. With my CPU I could not even install any OS unless I disabled most of the cores and even then it was unstable and any OS would eventualy crash simply by virtue of machine being tuned on. Idle, it would take multiple hours, surfing few hours at most, anything more intensive would crash it somewhere between instantly and handful of minutes... Just keep in mind I'm not saying it's 100% CPU fault on your end, but the symptoms look eerily familiar. FYI, my dud was a i9-13900k and it was working like a charm for 4 months before problems started.

About a year and a half ago I've had something similar happening to my machine but also had a USB failure at the same time. Once USB failure was resolved, I've still had crashes like you. I had some HDD spares, disconnected array disks from the machine, and installed various different Linux based OSes and Windows on the spares. All were very, very unstable. Failure was always connected to same 2 CPU cores (can't remember which ones, but it was always one or the other). I've tested with 2 different RAM sets (although my MEMTest was always a PASS on both sets), 2 different motherboards with different BIOS versions, different HDDs, even a different PSU. Only thing that made those unstable OS stable was a different CPU that I borrowed from a local PC repair shop. After some back and forth with Intel support, conclusion was that my CPU was in a pre-fail condition and it got replaced under warranty. Your mileage may warry.

Guys, thank you very much for replies. You've broken me out of my "thought loop" so to speak and given me great pointers how to proceed. @bmartino1 Tyvm for the screenshot of your main tab and the writeup. Helped greatly to visualise things better. As for 3-2-1- backup, I am set for my needs, though I don't do the last part of 3-2-1 offsite but rather have a solution where I monthly copy stuff I need on disks I keep safely stored and not used in any other way. @Vr2Io As far as power protection goes setup is as follows: UnRaid - 1500VA ups, set to poweroff server if it hits 5 minutes runtime capacity. Backup machine - 650VA UPS. Backup machine is low powered QNAP (not using their terrible OS though). Almost always turned off. Wakes on Lan when backup needs to run and powers down when done. Set to poweroff at 2 minutes remaining runtime. Bare metal and TV - 1000VA, run untill dry, which is never since they are turned on only when in use. POE capable switch, POE powered AP and POE cameras (powered through switch) and Modem, have it's own 1500VA, they run untill dry I both love you and hate you for saying "...how you define pool / array is main / backup. For me, I use array as backup tier,..", I've never thought abut this in a way you framed it. For me it was all on the array except NVMe directly passed to VMs. That sentence, combined with bmartino1's suggestion, solved it for me. As far as disk setup goes I'm gonna go very close to what @bmartino1 wrote in second post. For now 2 of the 3TB drives are gona go into array as xfs and third will go in array as zfs for replication, but I'll get 3 more larger drives at some later date for a second ZFS pool since @Vr2Io gave me some food for thought. Unraid array - party 1x WD Blue 4TB - array 2x WD Blue 3TB, as xfs 1x WD Blue 3TB, as ZFS 1x Toshiba 2TB, as xfs Cache disk 1x SanDisk Extreme Pro - 500 GB, as ZFS ZFS Pool raidz1 HDD 3x Seagate 16TB Segate Exos NVMe disks direct pass through to VM's Future expansion another ZFS raidz1 3 disk pool. Marking this as solved, but if anybody has anything to add or point out, feel free. Parhaps it can help somebody else in similar situation.

Got some new parts and recycled my old machine and now I need advice how to best setup arrays and pools. Usage is dockers, VMs (work+lite gaming), home automation with HomeAssistant, home security with coral TPU (offloading footage to another NAS) etc... I have secondary backup for important work and family data arranged on a separate machine in house so don't need too much parity wise. Machine would be on 24/7. Electricity cost is not an issue. CPU: i9-13900k RAM: at the moment 64Gb, going to 128Gb soon NVMe 1x Samsung SSD 970 EVO Plus - 2TB (VM pass through) 1x SanDisk Extreme Pro - 1 TB (VM pass through) 1x SanDisk Extreme Pro - 500 GB (was cache, xfs) NVMe were set this way in old machine. No more slots for extra NVMe are available on motherboard. HDD 3x Seagate 16TB Segate Exos, 7200rpm (new drives) 1x WD Blue 4TB, 5400rpm (formerly parity) 3x WD Blue 3TB, 5400rpm (were in array, xfs) 1x Toshiba 2TB, 7400 rpm (was in array, xfs) Motherboard can handle 6 more drives. I was keeping emulated VM HDD drives on cache (smallest NVMe) and would just pass through biger NVMe directly to VMs as extra drives. Worked like a charm. Is this best way to do it? How should I format HDDs, ZFS/xfs/btrfs and what combo? Is it sane to have parity protected Array with smaller HDDs and a ZFS pool with 3x 16TB Seagates? What FS should I use for array drives? How do I arrange VMs and shares in that case? What would you do? Any advice is wellcome.

Cloning and snapshots are a must (and in pipeline as you said) but native SR-VIO would also be nice.

The problem is still ongoing and is driving me up the wall. I've attempted with new flash device, but as soon as I update something, download anything, try disk access - machine goes berserk. I did in depth troubleshooting on hardware and I believe motherboard is the culprit as nothing else makes sense. At this point I'm in contact with motherboard manufacturer to see what they say. For now I've transferred my essential services on a spare Q-nap I had lying around and am awaiting their response.

Sorry to hear that mate. My situation is brand new UnRaid and brand new Windows install. Last time I did it I had to jump through hoops... add users and adjust bunch of settings and whatnot in windows and it took me a good while to get it running. The thing I did and posted above was done in about 30 minutes or less after a bit of browsing and works for me. Hope you find a solution.

I'm making a new unraid box so I encountered smb share issue with Windows 10 Pro. Here is solution that worked for me: Make new unraid user (the one you will access share(s) with) and add that user to a share. Make the share Public for now. In windows press Windows key +R and type gpedit.msc go to Computer Configuration > Administrative Templates > Network > Lanman Workstation Select "Enable Insecure Guest Logons" and switch it temporarily to Enabled. Leave that window open for now, you'll want to switch it back later. Open Files Explorer, right click Network and click Map Network Drive Under folder put in location the unraid share should be at (eg. \\Tower\isos if you added that new user to isos share) Select "Connect using different credentials" and click Finish. It will ask you for username and password of the user you just created and connect. When it connects, go back and revert "Enable Insecure Guest Logons" to "Not Configured". You may also delete that share in File explorer if you wish. In UnRaid you can now set the share to Secure/Private and still have access to it from Windows machine. Any new share with said user added will also be visible.

QNAP-EC You may add TS-453A to the list of known supported units. Works as intended.