TheFreemancer

It isn't? I solved it by disabling my onboard network adapter. It worked and I still don't have the interface rules. I've tried creating network-rules.cfg on /boot/config but this file is deleted at every boot. As I've seen in other threads this is a long lasting bug of unraid.

Hey, I have an onboard lan interface that I believe is Intel on my Asus motherboard. I recently got a Intel 2.5gbit NIC and as far as I can see it is blinking when the cable is plugged in. Besides that I can't see it on system devices and can't select it under network settings. There are several topics here saying you need to change it under interface rules but there's nothing of sort under network settings. I'm attaching the diagnostics here to find out what's going on. tower-diagnostics-20230709-1819.zip

Answering my own question XFS is faster compared to BTRFS: root@Tower:/mnt/cache# dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/cache/test2.img bs=3G count=1 oflag=dsync 0+1 records in 0+1 records out 2147479552 bytes (2.1 GB, 2.0 GiB) copied, 1.59658 s, 1.3 GB/s and doing a different test: root@Tower:/mnt/cache# dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/cache/test.img bs=1M count=5120 5120+0 records in 5120+0 records out 5368709120 bytes (5.4 GB, 5.0 GiB) copied, 2.34594 s, 2.3 GB/s Almost the same speed I was getting on windows.

Sorry to revive this topic but I need to ask one more question. I have replaced my kingston nv1 snvs/1000g for a adata XPG gammix s11 Pro that I was using in another PC. The XPG is much faster compared to the Kingston, I was getting 3GB/s with it on Windows. The m.2 connection on this motherboard is PCIE 3.0 X4 so it should max out at 32gbit/s and from previews tests with the kingston I was getting 1.3GB/s if writting directly to the cache. After replacing it: root@Tower:~# dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/cache/INCOMPLETE/test1.img bs=3G count=1 oflag=dsync 0+1 records in 0+1 records out 2147479552 bytes (2.1 GB, 2.0 GiB) copied, 2.32709 s, 923 MB/s Much slower. Before I try anything else, this cache drive is formated as BTRFS and I don't remember if the previews one was XFS. Should I go XFS for this drive to max out it's performance? Or file system matters little in this case?

That's fine, and thanks for the info. As I use it mostly for incomplete downloads from sabnzbd and for the rclone cache, which is already limited in size, this is fine.

Disk share would be the case I need better performance from another device on my LAN. That's a good info there. Mapping to /mnt/cache seems to be the answer. On Sabnzbd I've mapped to /mnt/cache/INCOMPLETE and the most performance difference I'm seeing is instead of using /mnt/user/rclone_cache is using /mnt/cache/rclone_cache/ Is there any complication that can come from using direct disk access instead of the user folder in the cache drive? I'm aware this is a problem when writting files to disks that are indeed part of the array.

It is set to only. Even tried prefer. As I understand this only changes how the mover will treat the folder. I want it to be outside of the array but still on the cache drive so I don't have to buy another NVME SSD just for this.

I replaced my 240GB SATA SSD with a 1TB M.2 NVME drive and I use it as cache drive. This cache drive is used for appdata, system, isos, VM img, docker img, all good part of the unraid system. But I also used it for partial downloads (incomplete folder) and for rclone cache. Now here's the problem: root@Tower:/tmp# dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/user/INCOMPLETE/test1.img bs=3G count=1 oflag=dsync 0+1 records in 0+1 records out 2147479552 bytes (2.1 GB, 2.0 GiB) copied, 4.36276 s, 492 MB/s and if it's outside of the array: root@Tower:/tmp# dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/cache/INCOMPLETE/test1.img bs=3G count=1 oflag=dsync 0+1 records in 0+1 records out 2147479552 bytes (2.1 GB, 2.0 GiB) copied, 1.68525 s, 1.3 GB/s How can I still have the INCOMPLETE folder but don't have it inside the array?

I've been reading the cache and cache pool FAQ but I still have some doubts and really would like some advice for my scenario. Right now I have a 240gb SSD sata drive as cache and a 2TB as unsigned device outside of the array. I don't use mover and only my appdata is on my cache drive. What I use my cache drive is for partial usenet downloads (incomplete folder) and I set on my unsigned device the complete folder. Usenet requires large unpaking and now that I'm getting a gigabit internet I want to improve my download speeds and specially unrar speed on completed downloads. I'm considering add a ssd nvme m.2 500gb drive and set it as cache. My question is, if I add it as cache pool the size missmatch will be a problem, right? If using raid0? Also this wouldn't be ideal because it would download on both and unpack on both. So, would be best to leave the 240gb as a complete download drive, and leave it as unsgined device and partial download on the new ssd nvme 500gb drive as a cache drive? And one final question, if appdata is not in any drive of the array, only on cache disk, if the cache disk dies, all data is gone, right? So, the best way to back it up, excluding the backup plugin and storing elsewhere, would be creating a script to copy it's content to the array every 24 hours, right? So if the drive dies, you just add another drive, set as cache and copy from the array to the cache drive. Does it sound as a good alternative?

So far so good. If the drive indeed fails, I can get another one and start rebuilding again, right?

Ok It's rebuilding now. Thanks for the help, hopefully everything goes well.

How do I do it? When rebooting the server I can assign the disk to the same slot but it is still disabled. Do I have to start it once with the slot disk set to none, reboot and assign the disk to that same slot again? Also when I set the disk4 slot to none the drive shows up as unsassigned device. Can the unassigned devices plugin do any harm to the files?

Yes I have tower-diagnostics-20220915-1009.zip

tower-smart-20220915-1037.zip tower-diagnostics-20220915-1039.zip I've rebooted the server and the drive wasn't showing up. I replaced the SATA cable and it showed up again but good 15 UDMC errors, I remember this drive had UDMC errors before. The drive is showing up again but still disabled. There's an option I never seen before "Read-check", I'm starting it as I don't think it will hurt, if I shouldn't do it I'll stop it. EDIT: I remember something similar when a drive got disabled and the solution was to rebuild on top of that particular drive. But this is dangerous because if it starts to rebuild and the drive actually fails, all data is gone if I remember correctly. Tbh, I don't remember how to do this and I'm not sure if this is the right thing to do.

This happened to me today, also running 6.10.3. I'll reboot my server and see if it come back online again.