Arbadacarba

So I have an Unraid server serving several VMs including my pfsense router... The pfsense box has a pair of nics, one of which on the Lan side is connected to a 1G router... My Unraid Server has a single 2.5G card connected to the same 1G router... My VM's are running e1000 1G nics What is the potential connection speed between my VM and the Shares on the Unraid server? Would that change if I were using a different vitual nic? How would I best test this? Thanks

That was my general understanding as well... But I've seen several references (By people who are fairly experienced with Unraid) talking about being able to use the card on Dockers and VM's... Not simultaneously but asynchronously without a reboot. On the upside, my experimentation required that I play games for 3 hours last night... So it's not a total loss.

And you DID install the NVIDIA Driver App in Unraid?

So I removed the VFIO Binding for my video card and rebooted the server... Then reset the Video card in my VM (Just in case) and it booted to the 4080 just fine... I did not expect that... I had always thought the Binding was required... I guess next, I will try loading the NVIDIA Driver and trying it again...

Can you run that command in the Go file? /boot/config/go Just nano and enter the line... Maybe with an Comment Above it?

Try Netdata... I've seen more than one update in a single day.

Is it that you (OP) don't want to update or it it just that you don't like the banner and want it to just do it and quit bugging?

That stopped me too... I may have to give it a shot. Question is: Does the VM Booting cause the dockers to fail or do they just lose the resource? Do they recover when the VM is shut down? As for how I got my GPU Passed Through in the first place I'm afraid I just did as little as I could. What Hardware are you running? Intel CPU Nvidia GPU? Have you got the video card bound to VFIO at boot?

I've read little references in a few other posts about optional ways to pass a GPU through to a VM... I've had a Nvidia GPU passed though to my Gaming VM (Passed through NVMe as well) and been very happy with the result when I'm playing Games on the VM. But that is not all that often... Sadly... I'm wondering if there is a better way to pass a GPU through that would let me use the GPU for other things in Dockers or even other VMs when I'm not gaming?

Have you checked the speed on that cache? I found I lost a lot of performance when I went to Raid1 for my Domains and such...

I'm a little confused about the icons to the left of the shares... They tell you the status of your shares with regards to data redundancy don't they? My Media Shares are on the main array with 6 drives and a parity drive... So they are good. (But I assume they should show a warning if I move a file onto the share and mover hasn't moved it off of the cache yet?) <-- Yes, that works My Cache is a single NVME drive (Wow things get exciting when you have mover completely fill the cache drive) and if I have a share set to ONLY is shows up with a caution icon that the data is not protected. My Pool (Systems - Best name I could come up with) is a Raid0 btrfs array comprised of two 4TB SSD drives. My system folder is on the Systems pool. and it is showing as protected... It shouldn't be should it... If anything it's worse than being on a single drive? I have a backup and if I lost that Pool I would be busy fixing it but not remotely upset about it. (My wife would be irritated though)

Dual SSD Cache (Configured in Raid 0)) rsync --progress --stats -v Test.mkv /mnt/cash/Backup 25,775,133,173 100% 1.11GB/s 0:00:21 (xfr#1, to-chk=0/1) 1,145,841,157.42 bytes/sec NVME (Again) rsync --progress --stats -v Test.mkv /mnt/cache/Backup 25,775,133,173 100% 1.81GB/s 0:00:13 (xfr#1, to-chk=0/1) 1,778,029,382.21 bytes/sec So we are back to a noticeable improvement in speed for the SSDs... So now... Do I set the NVMe drive up as Cache and the larger (But also unprotected) Pool as my working folder? And just make sure it is backed up to the array in case of drive failure? Or do the opposite? I think I would be better off using the much larger pool where I will have far more content... My System folder, my domains (VM Drives), and maybe a Steam Library? Just to be funny - Copying the file from one ram drive to another rsync --progress --stats -v Test.mkv /tmp 25,775,133,173 100% 1.98GB/s 0:00:12 (xfr#1, to-chk=0/1) 2,062,514,083.36 bytes/sec This is kind of an unexpected result... am I spoiling the other tests in some way with my methodology? Arbadacarba

Found This and it works but I expect it will break in 6.12... at least at first:

Debating if anything is changing in 6.12... May try again

Dual SSD Cache (No longer used as Cache...) rsync --progress --stats -v Test.mkv /mnt/systems/Backup 25,775,133,173 100% 341.82MB/s 0:01:11 (xfr#1, to-chk=0/1) 360,579,385.22 bytes/sec NVME (Just for a sanity check) rsync --progress --stats -v Test.mkv /mnt/cache/Backup 25,775,133,173 100% 1.80GB/s 0:00:13 (xfr#1, to-chk=0/1) 1,778,029,382.28 bytes/sec So I've Halved the speed of my SSD Array... Hmm... I didn't expect that.

Systems it is. I think I can live with that... my VM's are all on there so technically there are more than one system on it... At least that is what I'm telling myself. So now I have a NVME cache and SSD storage for VM's and System files Thanks

So I can't have a share with the same name as the pool? My goal was to have a pool of 2 2TB SSD's for the system folder on my unraid server... Somewhere to keep the Docker folders, appdata, domain folder, libvert file... I have them all on a pool called config, (because I was nervous about naming the pool System when I created it.) and am about to shuffle things around and thought I might try making it more accurate. Arbadacarba

Can I name a pool "System" and then store the system file on it? Will that cause any issues? Thanks

What is your network Type set to? Host? or something else? If you have it set to have it's own IP address you must "Enable Bridging" in network settings.

I think I found a solution... Copying a 25GB file to the ram drive and then copying that file to each of my drives. I figure this is giving me a fairly consistent view of the write performance of each of my drives: Spinning Rust Drives: rsync --progress --stats -v Test.mkv /mnt/disk1/Backup 25,775,133,173 100% 96.26MB/s 0:04:15 (xfr#1, to-chk=0/1) 100,512,382.22 bytes/sec rsync --progress --stats -v Test.mkv /mnt/disk2/Backup 25,775,133,173 100% 105.59MB/s 0:03:52 (xfr#1, to-chk=0/1) 110,412,959.48 bytes/sec rsync --progress --stats -v Test.mkv /mnt/disk3/Backup 25,775,133,173 100% 105.43MB/s 0:03:53 (xfr#1, to-chk=0/1) 110,412,959.48 bytes/sec rsync --progress --stats -v Test.mkv /mnt/disk4/Backup 25,775,133,173 100% 100.77MB/s 0:04:03 (xfr#1, to-chk=0/1) 105,445,505.27 bytes/sec rsync --progress --stats -v Test.mkv /mnt/disk5/Backup 25,775,133,173 100% 87.66MB/s 0:04:40 (xfr#1, to-chk=0/1) 91,585,882.91 bytes/sec rsync --progress --stats -v Test.mkv /mnt/disk6/Backup 25,775,133,173 100% 93.33MB/s 0:04:23 (xfr#1, to-chk=0/1) 97,842,224.06 bytes/sec Single Cache SSD rsync --progress --stats -v Test.mkv /mnt/cache/Backup 25,775,133,173 100% 604.45MB/s 0:00:40 (xfr#1, to-chk=0/1) 636,578,420.72 bytes/sec NVME rsync --progress --stats -v Test.mkv /mnt/config/Backup 25,775,133,173 100% 1.78GB/s 0:00:13 (xfr#1, to-chk=0/1) 1,663,317,808.97 bytes/sec I'll be combining the 2 SSD's together and testing them again

Take a look at my results from my setup... I'm told they are about what to expect: I'm just trying to decide on some changes to mine but I'm generally pretty happy with the speeds I'm getting

Trying to do a little further testing... I want to repeat this process but get as isolated results as I can. My previous tests copied files from one drive to another... What if I stored a file on the ram disk... Say 20GB? then copied it using the above methods to each storage type? since I am unfamiliar with the available tools, I am trying to get a share available on the ram disk (/dev/shm) but I'm having no luck. I tried creating a softlink (ln -s /dev/shm/test/ /mnt/user/Backup/Test2)within another share to a folder at /dev/shm/test but I get invalid path when I try to look in that on the device: Am I just barking up the wrong tree or am I making a minor mistake somewhere? WHY---------------- I have upgrades my two SSD drives a little to a pair of 4TB Samsung EVO drives... It occurs to me that I might be smarted keeping my system folder on that and moving my Cache to the 2TB NVME drive... My gaming VM is using another 2TB NVME so I don't need that much raw speed for my pfsense router - Home Assistant Server - and various test machines. But the added size and the fact that they are duplicated would add redundancy that I am currently going without. Thanks for any help Arbadacarba

Love this idea myself... Though it couldn't work in a docker could it? why not a plug in in the base os?

I've had similar problems, but it turned out I was causing them by removing Drives physically without dismounting them first.

If the helium is there for a reason and it is actually depleted for some reason, how could it not endanger the drive... I agree with itimpi - RMA the drive if you can. I think his answer implies that he thinks it could endanger the drive.