Jump to content

woocash

Members
  • Content Count

    15
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About woocash

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. If so, than the GUI should not say "enabled", and certainly it should not say next to it: "Status: Running" In reality something is clearly going on even if there is no user. Connecting to FTP server is giving different errors depending on the state of the switch: Enabled (no user assigned): "Connection closed without indication. The connection attempt was rejected." From time to time also "Error 500" Disabled: "Connection refused (Connection refused). The connection attempt was rejected." If the error message is consistently different, than the state of the server must be different - maybe not ftpd itself, but the firewall rules change? EDIT: correct, when FTP server is set to Enabled, even without any users, port 21 is open, whereas with server set to disabled it is closed as it should be.
  2. If I zoom in using mobile safari to open notifications menu (green button on the right side), the submenu opens waaaay to far to the left.
  3. Just do it so You have to click twice in different parts of the screen. So first - "reboot now", and then it expands, requires You to move mouse to the right, and press "confirm". Just in case I doulble-click it by accident.
  4. OK! Great to have it confirmed that no data loss would occur in case the passphrase is provided accidentally.
  5. Correct, so is it sensible to disable array start without an explanation, ask for a non existing password, if no new disk has been added, the existing ones are unencrypted, and there is no use for the password you are asking for? If so, what would happen if i provided the password, before starting the array?
  6. No, I never told unRaid to encrypt that particular disk, as stated in the previous post. I only told the system, that in case I add a new drive, the default filesystem should be xfs-encrypted - at least that is how in the settings this option is explained: "Defines the default file system type to create when an unmountable array device is formatted."
  7. Problem description: Unable to manually start array. Automatic start after reboot works ok. All drives are unencrypted (xfs) Visual manifestation of the problem: After stopping array manually, the START button on Main screen greyed out, input field below it asks for passphrase, even though there are no encrypted drives in the system. Temporary solution: Set "Default file system" in Settings > Disk Settings to "xfs" instead of "xfs-encrypted" Proposed solution: Connect asking for array disk passphrase in the GUI with at least one drive having an encrypted filesystem, not with default settings.
  8. OK, problem Solved, I think it's a bug actually. If in Settings > Disk Settings > Default file system is set to "xfs-encrypted", (which I probably set during my testing, and never actually encrypted any drives), than You will not be able to start array, even if it consists of only non-encrypted drives. The question what happens after applying password on Main screen, to enable array Start button is still to be answered.
  9. Hey, the trial worked great, bought the key (basic - 4 devices), and it prompted me to stop array to finish installing the key. Did that. Now the button to start array is greyed out and cannot be pressed. I rebooted the machine, array autostarted correctly. But if i stop it from GUI, I cannot start it due to greyed-out start button. So in effect every array stop, requires a machine reboot to restart the array. EDIT: Interestingly, when the array is stopped, it apparently cannot be started because it prompts me to "Enter new passphrase", as if the drives were encrypted? All of them re plain xfs and btrfs, so why the prompt? Should i put anything as the passphrase and its confirmation, or would it enable the encryption and god forbid format the drives?
  10. Is it possible to separate configuration form, to be able to set different port and address for the server to operate on, and different port to be input into user configs? I have my OpenVpn server running on power 1194 internally, but it is visible outside on port 443 using a dynamic dns name. With current config it is impossible to automatically generate working configs for the clients.
  11. I guess that was the fastest and finest diagnosis of any problem I had ever. 160MBps now Worked like a charm, appreciate it! Curious about that cache being disabled everywhere, even though in BIOS it's enabled. Will investigate further and update this post if i find the reason. Wonder if maybe DiskSpeed or other benchmarking tool i used, disabled it to get more "pure" results.
  12. Yes, read speed from data disk is the same as write speed to parity disk - around 45-49 MBps. Not sure if I named it correctly - basically in my array there is one 8TB data drive. I added another identical 8TB new and empty drive to the array as parity disk. I clicked "Parity-sync/data rebuild" to fill parity disk with parity data. Since then the speed of this process is very slow. The caching is enabled in BIOS. Looking through diagnostics I found lsscsi.txt which showed queue_depth of both my 8TB drives as 1, which if i understand correctly means NCQ is disabled. On the other hand in unRaid settings, NCQ is set to be enabled. Could this be the problem? I do attach diagnostics below.
  13. I am, the data drive has read speed matching the write speed of parity drive. Currently 47,9 MBps. If it helps diagnostically, I'm running 6.7.0-rc7
  14. Thanks for the answer. In disk settings, the Tunable(md_write_method), is since 5 minutes after the installation set to "reconstruct write". Is it possible that the disks do not use the setting, or have it reset somehow? Can i verify the method that is actually in use?
  15. Hi there! Let me start by saying that i am just trying unRaid for the last few days and like it a lot! I do have a question about parity calculation though. My HW is HP Microserver gen8 with G1610T CPU, two WD REDs 3 TB, two shucked HGST HE 8TB and 128GB SSD for cache. In my PC al HDDs bench slightly below 200MBps, in unRaid while doing parity calculation with only 2x8TB connected (2x3TB are unmounted, and not associated) the speed I am seeing is 40-50MBps. Is this to be expected? CPU load is never greater than 20%, so what is the bottleneck here?