GameKing505

Members
  • Content Count

    17
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2 Neutral

About GameKing505

  • Rank
    Newbie

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. The best feature is definitely the amazing unraid community. As far as feature requests, I’d love VM snapshots, and also some way to edit VM hardware and resources without destroying any custom xml that may have been added.
  2. Ideally I'd like to be able to modify for example, how many cores I've assigned to my OSX Virtual Machine, without needing to re-add in all of the custom XML that is needed to make the osx VM run. If I make these changes with the unraid UI, then my understanding is that custom XML would be overwritten. I was hoping that using virt-manager would let me make those edits while preserving the custom XML, but it appears you can't assign individual logical cores to a VM using the virt-manager docker?
  3. So there's no way to achieve CPU pinning using the virt-manager docker? That's disappointing... I thought the whole idea was that you got /more/ control than the default unraid GUI for VMs.
  4. In Virt-Manager I don't see a way to modify which logical cores are assigned to a VM (like in the native unraid UI). I see a way to assign a "current allocation" and "maximum allocation" of logical cores, as well as manually setting CPU topology, but nowhere do I see where to actually just set which logical cores are assigned to the VM. Am I missing something? I've seen screenshots of virt-manager that include this functionality. What I see in the docker: What I've seen of Virt-Manager elsewhere:
  5. I managed to get it all working with a passed through GTX 1080 on High Sierra but then mistakenly allowed the Mac App Store to make updates (not a full OS update but some sort of security patch). Now my display is messed up again at boot, even though the correct Nvidia web drivers are installed. OSX VMs seem like a PITA... Thoughts on how to fix it?
  6. Thanks SpaceInvader! I started over, followed those^ instructions, and got a working 2-core VM with passthrough. The key issue was just installing the nvidia drivers remotely when the screen was garbled. THEN I went and tried to change the # of cores in the VM (and made all the right edits to the XML again) and somehow this resulted in the VM not outputting to the display. It boots with a black monitor at 1280x1024 resolution. I can Splashtop in and use the VM no problem, but it won't even show me the full 2560x1440 resolution option in osx preferences. Any thoughts?
  7. Unfortunately I have tried that and it hasn’t worked. The only difference is that my paths are for the High Sierra OVMF flies and not the Catalina ones- but I assume that is as it should be. I’m still getting the graphical glitches...
  8. Thanks for the help! I am new to OSX VMs, clover, etc. so some of what you suggested may have gone over my head (my apologies). What I did - I mashed escape upon booting the VM to get to the VM BIOS. Then I poked around looking for resolution settings and found this screen: It seems the "preferred resolution at next boot" is 1080p and I seemingly can't change that option in the bios, but the "change preferred resolution for next boot" is set to the correct 1440p resolution. Is this right? Next I booted the VM and installed Clover Con
  9. I created a High Sierra VM and I am able to edit the # of cores in the VM Manager UI and then re-add all the changes to the XML, and the VM performs just fine (via VNC). However as soon as I add my GTX 1080 GPU for pass-through, I get a bizarre repeated and compressed image on the monitor. It's like the screen height is shrunk by 3x, and then the image repeats 3 times from left to right. Any thoughts on why this would be? I've seen others in this thread complain about the same issue, which they claimed was solved by adding the "<os>" section of the XML back in. I've done this
  10. There's no sensitive or critical data on the disk, just some media I could reacquire if needed. I will try the preclear method and see if it works.
  11. Great thank you. So the course of actions I plan to take is: Add new disk to the array Copy all the data from the questionable disk onto the new one Remove the questionable disk from the array, run preclear 3 times If the reallocated sector count does not increase... add the disk back into the array?? If the count does increase... just trash the disk? Does that sound right?
  12. Diagnostics file attached. Let me know what you recommend; I'm frankly still a bit confused by what the SMART attributes all mean, and at what point you absolutely have to replace a disk. You are correct the disk is not new. I had used it in a windows build prior to unRAID for a number of years. Diagnostics.zip
  13. I only just installed unRAID recently, and now it's reporting that one of my 4TB array disks has a "current pending sector" value of 2. I can run the SMART short self test with no errors, but when I run the extended test it gives back "Errors occurred - check your SMART report" Unfortunately I hadn't yet set up my parity drive. I have the 8TB drive sitting on my desk but I didn't bother to install it yet. Didn't think I'd get a failure so soon after setting up unRAID... It seems I can still read data from the array, as far as I can tell. What is my best
  14. That's a great point. I'm sure support /will/ come, if a little late. FYI- I ended up ordering the Asus X570 TUF Gaming plus and 32GB of G.SKILL Trident Z Neo, just based off the QVL list for the board. I'm hugely excited for the new build, as my last CPU was an i5 4670k. It served me well but this new beast is 4x the compute. Can't wait to get to my build and dive into the world of unRAID.
  15. Thanks for the reply! I think I'm pretty set on the 3900x. If this whole experiment doesn't work then I'll just rock windows and their semi-shitty implementation of Raid, with plex and all the relevant dockers, etc. I don't want to do that but it's a decent fallback if I surrender. I'm a decent tinkerer, and do derive some joy out of it, so I think I'm OK to run with trickier hardware. Any reason you went with x470 instead of x570? I hadn't considered that as an option but I do like the idea of a motherboard without a fan, which all the x570 boards seem to have. Not sur