Jump to content

ufopinball

Members
  • Content Count

    225
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

ufopinball last won the day on December 18 2018

ufopinball had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

17 Good

1 Follower

About ufopinball

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Converted

  • Gender
    Undisclosed
  • URL
    http://www.ufopinball.com/

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Looks like you have quite the variety of drives, so that complicates things. Here's how I would proceed. 1) Build a new array, ultimately your goal will be a solid, reliable array. Don't reuse any of your old drives since we are going to try an extract data. Note that with this method of recovery, I don't think you can rely on any drive giving you back 100%, so if you have to do a rebuild on any given drive (assuming you fully recover that many drives), I don't know how reliable your rebuilt drive would be, either. You're welcome to try it. If not, maybe start with 1 Parity and 1 Data and work your way up from there. I'm assuming you know which of the old drives are data and which were parity. This method recovers the data treating the old array drives as JBOD. 2) Take say the STBV5000100, buy another exact model drive. Last time, I bought a used working drive off E-Bay. Test the newer drive, make sure it works and is reliable. Replace the bad drive's board with the new drive's board. Plug the bad drive into the server and use something like Unassigned Devices to mount it, then see how much data you can copy off of it. Once you have extracted as much data as you can, unmount and remove your bad drive. Swap the controller boards back. Bad drive goes on the shelf in case you need it for further recovery. The newer drive can be pre-cleared and added to the array. Repeat this step for all drives. Something I heard was that reallocated sectors are recorded somewhere on the controller board. I heard it quite a long time ago, so I don't know if it is/was true. If it is, your recovery may involve accessing some incorrect sectors, which is why I think the data isn't guaranteed to be 100%, but again anything is better than 0%. This should also be non-destructive, so you could still use other methods to recover your data if you like. I have not heard of the diode fix, nor have I ever attempted to alter a controller board in any way. All I have done is a straight board swap, and hope that any data losses are livable. Thankfully, this isn't something that I have had to do regularly, but it has worked once or twice. PS: Dunno about the warranty, but I'd skip the soldering iron if you intend to go this route.
  2. ufopinball

    SSD advice m.2 and ssd config

    If I understand the proposed setup, the SSDs are passed through to the VMs, and are not governed by unRAID. They OS to worry about would be the target OS on each VM. Is that Windows 10?
  3. Are these drives of the same make and model? Do you have a list of the drives? I have swapped working logic boards onto otherwise dead drives in order to recover data, so it can be done. This is not a 100% guarantee, but some recovered data is better than no recovered data. You'll still have to replace the drives with (new) known-working drives, so this is going to be expensive and time consuming. FYI
  4. ufopinball

    SSD advice m.2 and ssd config

    To begin, are your m.2 drives the SATA variety, or the PCIe x4 variety? The former will run roughly the speed of your other SATA SSDs, the latter should run much, much faster. If you have PCIe x4 m.2 drives, you could try to have a mirrored cache and run all four gaming VMs off the drive. Samsung's SATA SSDs advertise "Up to 540 MBps" where as the PCIe x4 m.2 SSDs offer "Up to 3500 MBps". Even with four VMs running at a time, you should still have a lot of headroom speed? It may depend on what else (if any) you're using your cache drive for, though. The alternative is you have 4 VMs, and 4 SSD NVMe type drives. Pass through 1 drive for each VM and you should enjoy dedicated performance for each VM from its assigned drive. If performance is an absolute must, maybe this is the way to go?
  5. ufopinball

    SSD array drive

    Oh, okay. I have not pushed Cache beyond two drives mirrored. I'll keep it in mind for future reference. The most I see is people would like the option to have multiple cache pools. Dunno what priority that has on the wish list.
  6. ufopinball

    SSD array drive

    Noted, but I already have a RAID1 cache pool (see signature). SSD capacities are going up and prices are coming down (relatively speaking). My needs are not so great that I'm out there buying 12TB drives, so someday I'd like to switch over to SSDs. This may be years in the future, but it may also be a slow migration away from HDD to SSD, depending on how often I access data on any given drive. I'm not going to RAID1 my 40TB of existing space as SSD, I rather like the current set up with two Parity drives and ten Data drives. I mean, if you never want to add an SSD to your array, that's fine. I understand the options available via cache, but I want to do this specifically as an array drive. Since this configuration appears to be supported, I'll start with a small 1TB SSD and see how things go.
  7. ufopinball

    SSD array drive

    Good to know, thanks for the info!
  8. ufopinball

    SSD array drive

    Thanks, I will run a parity check here and there to make sure. The drive was one of my old cache pool drives and has not given me issues. It's still fairly young, as far as SSDs go. It's also a 1TB drive and I don't really know that I'll be eating up so much of it, I guess it will come down to usage once I have it installed. As I mentioned in the other post, this is mostly for quick-access to Read existing data. It's not going to be a heavy R/W sort of drive (like a cache drive) so hopefully TRIM won't be such a big issue.
  9. ufopinball

    SSD array drive

    I have a cache drive. An array drive means I get Parity protection in case of a drive failure, and cache or UD doesn't offer that. The performance boost I'm looking for is on the Read end of things. Writing to this drive will likely be relatively rare, it's just data I don't want to wait for a HDD to spin up for.
  10. ufopinball

    SSD array drive

    I upgraded some stuff via Black Friday, and now I have a 1TB SATA SSD that I'd like to use as an array drive. I understand there is no TRIM for array drives. Otherwise, is this configuration supported? Is anyone else here doing this? Also, in order to add this to an existing array, presumably I have to at least do a pre-clear (zero the drive) and have a pre-clear signature written. Anything else I should be aware of? Thanks in advance!
  11. ufopinball

    Unraid OS version 6.6.6 available

    Upgraded from 6.6.5 to 6.6.6 a few days ago ... no smoke, no fires.
  12. ufopinball

    Unraid OS version 6.6.5 available

    Upgraded yesterday from 6.6.0 to 6.6.5. No issues so far, and no problems starting Dockers or VMs. Thanks again, LT!
  13. ufopinball

    Phenom II X6 1055t

    I'm using a Kill-A-Watt like measurement tool. And I've swapped the graphicscard out for a low power alternative and the GTX970 draws arount 10-13 watts. So 100W-13W=87W which is still too much with all disks spun down. I thought it would be around 50W at worst without the graphicscard... The last part I could swap is the motherboard... Okay, so the Ryzen 1800X is no longer an unRAID box. That said, I set up my Kill-a-Watt and booted off my spare unRAID thumb drive. There's nothing configured. The machine is largely empty, there are no SATA drives nor SATA controllers. There is one SAMSUNG 960 EVO M.2 1TB NVMe, the Display card is an even older ASUS Radeon HD 4350 EAH4350, and this (normally Desktop) system uses Crucial Ballistix Elite 16GB (2x8GB) DDR4-2666 CL16, which is substantially less RAM. I have no VMs set up. So, certainly not apples-to-apples but it's the best I can do under current circumstances. At the wall, once the unRAID boot reaches the login prompt, the Kill-a-Watt reports 43 watts at idle. So minus the dozen or so spun down SATA drives, an 8-port SATA controller, and less (16GB vs 64GB) memory, the 43 watt total comes in at 75% of the previously reported 55 watts. That seems pretty fair to me. At least the readings some reasonably consistent. Comparatively your 87 watts is nearly 40% more than my original 55 watt reading. I really don't know what could eat up that much more energy. The 1800X is binned higher than the 1700-series, but again that's a substantial leap in power consumption. Anything further from here is purely guesswork. Maybe try another forum and see if you can find someone with a more similar setup to yours and see what they're getting? You could also try to replicate my recent test (pull power cables or whatever) and see how close to 43 watts you could get?
  14. ufopinball

    Phenom II X6 1055t

    Cyber Power System, Inc. CP1500 AVR UPS. It is currently reporting 0.090 Kw (or 90 watts) for my Threadripper 1950X system sitting idle with disks spun down. The Windows 10 and LAMP VM are running, along with Plex (nobody's watching anything). This is effectively the normal idle for the system. I don't know why the UPS would report differently from anything else. How are you measuring your power consumption? Can you swap out the GTX970 for something else and re-test?
  15. ufopinball

    Phenom II X6 1055t

    I don't remember doing anything specific. Probably just running on stock settings. I don't overclock and I don't game. I may have chosen the more power efficient profile in the BIOS. I would guess the GTX970 is pretty power efficient at idle, but then I don't have a lot of experience with those? It's all I can think of.