JustOverride

Not sure how I missed that, disregard my post then. Keep up the great work LT.

Let me start by saying that I love Unraid. I’ve been using it since I bought it, and I don’t see myself straying from it. However, if it wasn’t for the lifetime membership, I highly doubt I would have bought it. I know you have your reasons, and they’re 100% legitimate. I’m just saying I wouldn’t have made the purchase otherwise. I might have even bought another license down the road, but now I’m looking at alternatives like TrueNAS, XCP-NG, and Proxmox instead. It’s the same reason I mainly use Plex over Jellyfin—I bought the lifetime license. Despite some of the bad decisions Plex is making, I’m overall okay with it. So I’m just saying that maybe there are other ways to monetize this platform, and those should be explored. Joining the subscription bandwagon is not the way, in my humble opinion. Again, just my feedback. #loveUnraid

I've already took it off and going to change my layout instead to run the ZFS from a big NVMe so I won't need to cache from another drive, but if I decide to run it this way again and run into problems I'll post it. This is running in my production environment ( I know I shouldn't do betas in production but you know, w.e) that being said I'm not going to experiment further. BTW, why isn't the destroy command just added to the GUI delete when needed?

The mover wasn't destroying it. I'm not running any custom scripts for moving files. I also ran it manually.

Because I see that right now this is causing problems as I mentioned above, and you said that was normal/expected. To explain in further detail... 1 drive HDD XFS pool, with a 1 drive NVMe ZFS pool (as cache) is causing folders to be made in the cache pool but not able to be deleted unless I ZFS destroy. These folders already exist in the HDD XFS pool. Also I'm seeing permission errors that don't happen otherwise. Is this the expected behavior or is this a bug?

If this is the case, you can't use a ZFS pool as cache pool for another pool? If so, I guess it would make sense why when it is setup this way things just don't work well. If this is the expected behavior then I think Unraid shouldn't allow setting a ZFS pool as cache imo, or at least show a message of the expected use-case.

Can confirm, I'm having the same problem. I have 1 drive xfs pool that works, but once I add a zfs cache drive I get permission errors and problems. Also the share folder is unable to be deleted unless I use zfs destroy. I'm on 7.0.0 beta 2.

I'm on 7B2, I seem to be having permission issues. I tried running the new permission tool, and re-editing the permissions for each user(made things a little better as I could now I had rights to view into folders), yet I get errors when trying to write to the shares that I have read/write permissions. One of the changes I made worth mentioning was that I changed my cache drives to ZFS, and that cache drive then writes to the unraid pool.

I think this project has been abandoned.

I'm getting the following message: "Share SHARENAME set to use pool ZZZZ, but files / folders exist on the YYYYY pool" So pool ZZZZ is a NVM cache pool in ZFS, YYYYY is a separate pool of a HDD in XFS. All I did was add the cache drive to work for the HDD as that is something you can do on the latest Unraid version. I'm on 7.0.0-beta.2 (so thats probably why I got the error). But I thought I'll mention it.

Soooo, lets say someone 😐 entered a YT channel, and now the whole channel is downloading. Stopping/Restarting the container is not cancelling the download. How do I do that does someone cancel the process now? (Edit) I loove its simplicity, and clean layout, but really why isn't there a stop button?

to

🙃 I thought this was implemented but when I went to actually use it today I see that it isn't. I guess we wait now.

This seems like a great option for unraid. Should be added to unraid by default IMO. I haven't added it yet just because I can't be bothered to stay on top of it to ensure it works well. For example Nextcloud is already pushing its luck with the random issues it has that requires manual updates, etc.

I updated without backing up the USB, restarted without stopping the array...lolyolo Updated without issues, no parity check, (everything went as expected). Thank you team!