Tom3

Retried the update. This time 7.2.3 --> 7.2.6 on the Unraid system clocking the Update Available flag in the banner. This worked correctly, no issues. No problem with Boot Failure. 7.2.4-->7.2.5 must have been a fluke. -- Tom

Copying /config from the backup to the USB did not work, still Boot Error. Copying all files in the root of the backup (e.g. linuz boot files plus all others) did not work Boot Error. Used USB Creator 1.1.0 on a Win10 machine to recreate the USB from the backup file, and that successfully booted into the older version (7.2.3 was the last backup). UEFI server boot. -- Tom

Intel boot loader reports 'Boot failure' after 7.2.4 --> 7.2.5 upgrade. Has worked flawlessly since back in the 6.8 days. Does not boot so am unable to generate diagnostics. -- Tom

Recently all my Win 10 and Win 11 machines lost connectivity to Unraid shares. Traced it down to the network type setting on windows, apparently some update changed each from Private to Public. Resetting each Win machine to Private restored access for me. -- Tom

That motherboard supports DDR5 UDIMM non-ECC memory (according to the Supermicro website). https://www.supermicro.com/en/products/motherboard/x13sae DDR4 and DDR5 RAM have the slots in different alignments because they are not interchangeable. Is it possible you are trying to insert DD4 RAM? -- Tom

Thank you. Community Apps 2025.05.30 fixes the issue on Unraid 6.12.15. What awesome support ! -- Tom

Same problem 6.12.15 - the Community Apps update gives a blank page. How does one downgrade back to the previous version?

188 Mega Bytes / sec is 1504 Mega bits / second (1.5 Gbits/sec) , about 60% of the maximum possible. My experience is that the disk(s) on the Windows client and the host can be a limiting factor in transfer speeds. The suggestion to try using iperf is a good one, it minimizes disk speed as a factor in the test. -- Tom

Did you set "Turn off UPS after shutdown" to Yes in the Settings -> UPS panel? -- Tom

Christian Lempa did a YouTube video today about the 585 in Unraid. He eventually removed the 585 and replaced it with an ASM-based solution. You may want to see the problem he had and his conclusions. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMHMkpA5XnM -- Tom

The Intel X722 feature support matrix does not list 2.5GbE as being a supported mode that I can find: https://cdrdv2-public.intel.com/336882/336882_Intel® Ethernet Connection X722 Feature Support Matrix_rev3_3.pdf -- Tom

You may want to check whether both SFP+ optics modules are the same type. 10Gbase-CX4 is a very old standard, it uses 4 copper lanes over a bulky twinax cable. My recollection is that there are also some format differences going back that far. Run the ethtool command on each interface, for example: $ ethtool eth0 and see what it reports. If both modules are actually SFP+ and are both labeled 10Gbase-SR, and ethtool reports that one is -CX4, then it's possible that module is damaged, had its MDIO overwritten, or you may be selecting the wrong interface (i.e. asking about eth1 when perhaps the module is plugged into eth2 or some such). -- Tom

Do you have a switch or router that is not protected by the UPS? My UPS has 4 outlets that are powered during an outage, but 2 that lose power during any outage (they are 'convenience' outlets, meaning 'not-at-all-convienent'). I had my router plugged into one of those 2 and would lose access to UNRAID (and everything else) after an outage until the router was manually reset. -- Tom

Thank you! Thank you! This fixed a tailscale problem. Prior to the patch, tailscale was removed on update due to the error. Fortunately Unraid keeps the previous template, so reinstall worked easily. -- Tom

During my 6.12.8 upgrade, the interfaces did not do a link down. This resulted in the DHCP server re-assigning new IP addresses to all the interfaces on UNRAID. Once I found those, everything came up OK on the new addresses. -- Tom

The update to Firefox 113.0 has resolved the noVNC problem. It appears that 112.x.x versions have the issue. -- Tom

Speculation... If sufficient errors were detected, the link might auto re-negotiate the link speed. That might fail for 1 GbE, then retry and succeed for 100 MbE. Can you disable auto negotiation, and set the link to only 1 GbE at the router? At the server? -- Tom

Hi Mike - early on, the equipment on each end used Link Aggregation to package 4 10GE links as a single 40 GE link. This is where some issues cropped up. The ratified version of the 802.3 ba standard (June 2010) for 40GE & 100GE inserted something called Multi Lane Distributor (MLD 64/66b) to handle all this in hardware chips on the Ethernet ASIC interfaces ahead of the physical interfaces. (The physical interfaces generally don't know about this). Your Mellanox interface is one end, the ethernet switch that the cable is plugged into is the other end. So the question is what is the age of the equipment on each end of the link? If both ends are listed as being 802.3 ba compliant, then you should be OK. Practically most equipment took several years after the standard rataification to adopt everything. -- Tom

40GE can be a bit of a rat's nest. The physical standards are primarily 4-lane interfaces (4 copper lanes, or 4 optical lanes). That usually makes the transceivers a bit expensive. Many of the initial deployments of 40GE used it as 4 independent 10GE links with a special break out cable arrangement. This was done as a way to increase the density of 10GE interfaces on a piece of equipment, not as 40GE links. For 40GE use those usually had link aggregation (x4) to treat the bundle as a single 40GE point-to-point. If your application is as a single-40GE-link (which is what it sounds like), you need to be concerned with compatibility of the two ends, both physically and with link aggregation compatibility. Expect to need a fair amount of configuration effort. There were a number of link aggregation issues back in the 2010-2015 time frame where the two ends just would not talk between vendors. Whether older equipment was eventually harmonized I don't know (and is probably vendor and model number dependent). -- Tom

Found the problem. It appears the VNC VM GUI display does not play well with Firefox 112.0.1 on the Ubuntu client. The previous days version of Firefox worked fine, so likely the latest update (I think this is the most current version). I cleared browser cache on the Firefox client - that did not improve anything. I launched Chrome 112.0.5615.121 on the Ubuntu client, and that works well with the VMs. -- Tom

Hi JorgeB - thanks for the reply! Using the console to transfer large files between NVMe and HardDrives is very fast in both directions, no errors. -- Tom

This morning, all VM's (old, new, recently updated, not recently updated) suddenly are extremely slow. On 6.11.5. The UNRAID GUI seems fine and snappy, it's just the VM's. Opening a console window on a VM that worked fine yesterday brings up a sluggish console window - very very slow to resize. Running 'top' in that window VM shows nothing consuming large CPU resources or memory for that VM, adequate free space and CPU. Five or Six Ubuntu 20.04 and 22.04 VMs tried, all slow as molasses. Running Firefox in the VM is almost impossible, 10-12 seconds to respond to each mouse click, but it does function correctly eventually. All services run by VM are almost ground to a halt. Only update this morning was I think unassigned devices plugin 2023.04.17 Rebooted the server, no improvement. Server memory, disk stats look fine. Network working correctly. Docker images come up fine and the GUI is very responsive, so this seems isolated to just the VMs. Diagnostics attached. -- Tom tower-diagnostics-20230418-1000.zip

Dynamix ssd trim plugin - is it still needed? On Unraid 6.11.5 I am getting a plug-in file install error, referencing: /boot/config/plugins-error/dynamix.ssd.trim.plg The button to remove it does not work. The file is in fact in the /boot/config/plugin-error/ directory. Is this plugin still needed, or has it been superseded by upgrades to UNRAID over time? If it's no longer needed, can it just be manually deleted from the containing directory? -- Tom

Having difficulty updating to Dynamix System Statistics 2023.02.05a When clicking the UPDATE button nothing happens. Under the tab Plugin File Install Errors one item is listed: /boot/config/plugins-error/dynamix.ssd.trim.plg It shows a status of ERROR. When clicking the Remove button for that, nothing happens. Have since rebooted the server, the above does not change. There are no obvious errors in the log. The graphical stats page continues to work On Unraid 6.11.5. -- Tom

Are you accessing it via an IP address (e.g. 192.168.x.x) or via a domain name / suffix (e.g. mytower.myhomenetwork). IP addresses can sometimes be re-assigned by your router (or ISP modem/router) on reboot which perhaps might change the IP. If you are using a domain name, do you have a DNS that knows how to redirect it internally? Does that need to have it's IP updated? If your server is using static IP than that shouldn't be an issue. Are you using My Servers service? (if so, that's a bit outside my experience). -- Tom