Jerry1111

Sorry for reporting back late - got distracted with house stuff. I took the server out, cleaned and re-seated all of the connectors. Ran extended smart test, followed by read-only parity - everything is back to normal. Many thanks for help. Given my random collection of old disks (and this scare!) it's probably time to slowly start to swap the disks for the new ones. Probably I have to do it slowly, to avoid all of the new disks falling into the same valley of the failure bath-curve. On the other hand - if it ain't broke...

I can't see any more errors on disk2, the count in the Errors column is 1024 (suspiciously round number). I have tried some random reads of files from that disk - no errors generated, but then it doesn't tell anything about the disk, it's only a "weak" indication that cables are OK (I have reconnected all connectors). I started extended self-test, we'll see. Are these 100 errors fully correctable, or do I have to worry that 100 sectors might be gone forever? The setup is old (well, it was new in 2012 ), so probably time to refresh. Biggest problem - don't want to change all disks at the same time to avoid risk of being in the same place of the bathtub curve with the whole storage. I only ever had one disk fail in this setup - 1ST500LM021-1KJ152_W621GQWL - 500 GB (sdj), which annoyingly was the only cache at that time. Thankfully it wasn't too difficult to rebuild VMs and dockers.

Unraid was working without problems for a number of years. Suddenly I had "Parity check finished (100 errors)". Below is history of parity checks and diagnostics attached. I don't want to do anything silly, so thought it's better to consult experts on the forum. tower.home-diagnostics-20220316-2206.zip

I had a few powercuts, and I suspect the world data file many have been corrupted (I started to get bigger lags and server hanging up for 60s). I tried to copy a few worlds from the backup folder into another world folder (naming these world1, world2, ...) and changing the name in server config. The thing is that the "current" world has the correct seed, but even a backup from 2 days ago has an old seed, that I stopped using at the beginning of November. How _exactly_ is the backup feature of the java server working? The "current" world that I'm playing on is in folder "world15" (don't even remember why - probably that's what I copied from PC and just didn't rename to "world"). I was trying different backups but all of them have the wrong seed. So is the backup only ever copying the "world" folder, or is it copying the folder that the config file is pointing the server to?

I'd like to replace my current noname case with something that can house at least 3 of 3x5 cages. The space earmarked for the server is just big enough for a rack-mountable case without its mounting flanges. I wouldn't want to spend too much money on this one (the wife's approval problems), so the case I'd like to use is Norco RPC-470 (or an equivalent), unless someone can suggest cheaper alternative with at least the same amount of space. This cage has space for two fans (left and center) and three 5.25 slots on the right. I'm assuming I can fit a 5x3 into the slots on the right, but I can't find any information if it's possible to fit two more cages instead of fans, has anyone successfully done it? Best Regards, Jerry1111

Your unraid box needs to know your fully qualified DNS name, not just 'tower'. Please, please think carefully before doing that - as others have written, you can be hacked within hours if you leave open unsecured ports forwarded to your Unraid box. If you don't know how to setup a VPN then you shouldn't really be exposing vulnerable Unraid to the 'elements' of the modern internet. As you can see if different places of Unraid documentation: You have been warned. Jerry1111

Fixed - the problem was that somehow (probably during the upgrade) the server reverted to the default name 'Tower', instead of tower.home Fixed the config, restarted and everything works! Grrr... I feel like a fool now - I should've spotted capital T in Tower. It was in front of my eyes all the time

When I'm accessing unmenu remotely via a vpn, half of the hyperlinks are not correct. Some links point to "http://tower:8080/..." (these are unusable remotely) and some point to "http://tower.fully.qualified.domain.name:8080/..." (these work fine). IIRC the top menu has only local links and individual pages have mostly fully qualified links. The issue doesn't exist with local access - both links will resolve to the same machine, so I didn't even know the problem existed until I've tried to access my server remotely. Googling this forum hasn't revealed similar threads.

Thanks for pointing it out - it doesn't! When I was comparing all the possible cards, I've noted down M1015 as having only 4 PCIe lanes - my mistake. From this point of view both cards are equal. I understand that issues with spinup/spindown were fixed in 5.0-rc6-r8168-test2, so there should be no obvious differences between those cards. I'm assuming worst case scenario of 3 reads (video streams) and 1 write (me copying a large file) at the same time. Parity sync/check... well, if for the same money (prices of both cards are roughly equal in the UK) it can happen faster then it's worth thinking about. Of course all of this is theoretical, I've made a mistake of assuming that M1015 has only 4 lanes. I have also a plan for a 'backup-like' script which would rsync most important folders to a drive outside of the array, so at least some of the data is protected from 2 drive failures. This could be happening overnight, so shouldn't be included in the worst-case scenario. Thanks again guys for pointing it out!

I'm looking for a PCIe SAS card with 2x SFF-8087 ports (for 8 SATA drives, with a small probability of using an expander in future). Currently I'm using all the ports on the motherboard and its time to grow the array (and purchase a Pro license as well). The setup runs ESXi5 on a Z68A-GD65 (so PCIe2.0, not PCIe3.0) with several VMs, one of which is Unraid 5.0-rc6-r8168-test. I would like to pass-through the new SAS card directly to Unraid. For performance reasons with eventual expander I would prefer that PCI bandwidth is bigger on equal than the SATA bandwidth (so I don't want to have issues with saturated PCI bus). This rules out the IBM M1015 card. The question is - what else? After a long evening on lime-tech formus all I know for sure is that AOC-SAS2LP-MV8 hasn't been (yet) proven as working with ESXi5/unraid/passthrough combination. 3TB+ disk support is a must. There is a probability that as I need more drives I'll decide to get a SAS expander (my motherboard has only 2 PCIe x16 slots and 3 PCIe x1 slots), which is the main reason not to use M1015 or SASLP-MV8. Money... yeah, if I spend too much then my wife will have me sleeping with the server ;-(