Ruato

Members
  • Posts

    53
  • Joined

Report Comments posted by Ruato

  1. 44 minutes ago, JorgeB said:

    Using zfs for array drives will allow you to detect data corruption, but if found zfs cannot repair it since there's no redundancy in the filesystem, it's works the same as it already did with btrfs.

     

    I tried to "study" what benefits moving to zfs would bring compared to the traditional Unraid array with xfs formatted drives. I failed to get a clear picture of this. I'm sure quite many will wonder this same when a stable 6.12.x will be released. Would it be possible to generate a short FAQ for this? That is,

    • What benefits/disadvantages there are for formatting individual Unraid array disks to zfs instead of xfs?
    • What benefits/disadvantages there are for changing from an Unraid array (xfs) to a zfs pool? For example, does one loose the advantage that in case of disk failure the files in other disks are still intact as the files are written to a single disk instead of distributed to several array disks?
    • What are the requirements of zfs? That is, I understood that it heavily utilizes RAM and therefore one should have plenty of it to maintain system performance.
    • ECC-memory is also mentioned when googling about zfs. Is it more important than with xfs for example? Of course, ECC should always been used but I guess most of Unraiders do not have ECC in their systems.
    • Etc.

     

    Anyway, great progress on Unraid! One happy user here.

  2. A question regarding cache pools.

     

    I have installed my dockers using a path /mnt/cache/... instead of /mnt/user/... This because of earlier instructions about preventing a data corruption issue. What measures regarding this should I take when updating from 6.8.3 or should it work without changing anything?

     

    Thank you!

     

  3. Quote

    Linux kernel:

    version 5.7.2

    CONFIG_WIREGUARD: WireGuard secure network tunnel

    ...

     

    Hi,

    Do you already have an idea or have decided how will the Wireguard functionality differ from the current Wireguard plugin feature? That is, will there be an easy to use configuration view as for the plugin or..?

    Thank you for all your hard work!

     

  4. 1 hour ago, wgstarks said:

    Yes, probably days, weeks or months. All depends on how many more issues require a fix and how many more RC’s that takes. LT isn’t likely to commit to a schedule (totally understandable).
     

    The only other answer you might get is “soon”.

    Yes, understood. As I wrote in the original post, I do not expect any guarantees. I was looking for "an educated guess" based on the earlier releases but I understand that each release has its individual properties/issues.

  5. 3 hours ago, Can0nfan said:

    you mean 6.8?
    its pretty stable you should try it, you can always roll back if you have issues

    Yes, 6.8. I do not know what I was thinking when writing. OK, maybe I'll take a shot. Thank you for the reply!

    I was just wondering whether it will probably be days, weeks or months..

  6. I know that nothing can be promised and I do not expect that. However, is it possible to predict based on the earlier releases when the first stable 3.8 will see daylight? That is, I am craving for updating to 3.8 (Intel 9th gen iGPU support and Wireguard support) but also need to minimize any risk of issues to the array as it is somewhat mission critical that I am running there.

     

    Any info appreciated!