Passi

So I just tested a free NFS client for windows and the problem with "network resource not available any more" really seems to be a problem with SMB (Strict allocate) as mejutty found out. Copying immediately starts and you can see the file size growing on the server (with SMB you see the final size once copying starts). I don't think that there is a way to change the Samba-Setting for us?

Well I found that if I use teracopy I get more consistent results in being able to copy up the files. I am however no longer able to build iso files on the fly direclty to the server. Did a bit more reading and found the issue may be something to do with Samba Strict Allocate problem in that it will write a file with 0's to the size you are trying to write. Using NFS may get around the issue but it is just a pain as it is another thing to install/configure. I've got the same problem here, too. As you said, the server seems to allocate the needed space and the copy times out before it has finished. But it only happens if the target disk you are copying to is "low" at free space (20-30% free). There is a thread for this problem here: http://lime-technology.com/forum/index.php?topic=19207.0 Is there any simple way to mount a NFS share into Windows explorer to check if that would "resolve" the issue? It's just annoying if you start copying 2TB over night and at morning you see it stopped at 10% because of this error.

Just to not let this problem die: I am pretty sure that this is the same problem as described here: http://lime-technology.com/forum/index.php?topic=16840.msg169813#msg169813 http://lime-technology.com/forum/index.php?topic=16840.msg172082#msg172082 It's excactly what I've discovered and described in my thread: When starting to copy a file, the server first tries to allocate the space but since it is a large file, it takes longer than the windows time-out. But this problem only occurs when the free space on the target disk is getting lower (about 20-25% free space, so many times enough free space for the file to copy). I can reproduce this issue. I just inserted a fresh 2 TB disk yesterday and copied about 1.5TB without any problem, but then the problem "Network resource not available any more" rises again and you have to try several times until it begins to copy the file.

Sounds like the problem that I've described here: http://lime-technology.com/forum/index.php?topic=19083.msg170946#msg170946 Another user had the problem too, here: http://lime-technology.com/forum/index.php?topic=18747 Unfortunately there seems to be no solution for this problem yet.. I notice this problem with different copy programs, different OS, and even SMB or NFS. I noticed also, that this happens only at the start of transferring a new file. When it begins copying, the file is completely copied. But if it does not start, then an error occurs like "Network resoure is not available any more". I also noticed that if this error occurs, the target data disk is working and working but nothing happens. The parity disk is doing nothing in this time. If you retry to copy the file, it usually works.

Hi, thank you for all your answers :-) Sorry for not being clear, 25MB/s is the speed that I was counting with and which is absolutely ok for me. The other thing that I mentioned yesterday is the thing that I am worring about a bit now. It's exactly the same behavour as described here: http://lime-technology.com/forum/index.php?topic=18747 and here: http://lime-technology.com/forum/index.php?topic=17568 But unfortunately for me the solution is not the split level (as is it in the second linked thread), because I set it to 0 and I've got only one data disc which is signifcantly smaller than the parity disk. The first thread linked is descriping my problem from yesterday exactly, but there is no solution :-( Today I observed a perfect behavior without changing anything on the system. Right now I am copying 336Gb to the server with an average speed of 30Mb/s. And I tried several times to provoke the "Network resource is not available any more" error, but everything was going fine. Edit: Ok, the problem exists again. In the middle of copying it suddenly stopped, saying "A problem has occured when trying to access the network drive. I think that this happens only when the next file is going to be copied. If one file starts copying, it copies completely and successfully. I attached a syslog of today where everything is going fine. If it falls back to a bad mode where performance is low or the error appears again, I will post another syslog and we can compare them. What I noticed is that I have to use the second NIC. Even if both NICs are the same chip (INTEL), the first one will not work properly (10Mb/s and getting errors). Unfortunately the mainboard is not able to disable only one NIC (can only disable both or none), I always have to manually disalbe the first NIC and enable the second one (using ifconfig). Any suggestion how this can be automated? Edit: Copied the ifconfig commands to the go script and now it seems that unraid automatically chooses the second NIC. Thank you again for your great support! Best regards, Pascal syslog-fine.txt

Hi, it is a gigabit network. ethtool eth0 gives me: Supported link modes: 10, 100 and 1000base/full Speed: 1000Mb/s Duplex: Full Port: Twisted Pair None of the drives run in IDE mode, all in AHCI. I tried several things now: 1. Updated BIOS to newest version 2. Used other S-ATA cables 3. Used other LAN cables 4. Used other switch 5. Used second NIC on the board The only thing that changed something was option 5. With the second NIC on the board I get a better performance now (about 25Mb/s). BUT at the moment (the only data drive is quite full now, 200Gb free), I am getting always an error when copying new files to the server: "There was a problem with the network resource." Any idea about that? I also installed Windows on a SSD I got lying around and did some tests there: Write and read speed via SMB in average 80Mb/s and 90Mb/s. So this seems to be an unRAID problem? Thank you for your help and best regards, Pascal

Hi all, I am new with unRAID and last week I built my first unRAID server. I used the following components ("The Beast" from recommended builds): MB: Supermicro X8SIL-F CPU: Intel i3-550 RAM: 2 x Kingston KVR1333D3S8E9S/2G (2GB) PSU: Corsair Enthusiast Series TX750 V2 Parity: WD Green WD30EZRX 3TB 5400rpm Data: WD Green WD25EZRX 2.5TB 5400rpm Flash: Sandisk Cruzer Fit 4GB USB-Stick Using unRAID 5.0 Beta 14 Basic. The system is working, but the write-performance to the server is bad. In average I am getting 10.5Mb/s when writing to the server. Reading gives me an average of 90-100Mb/s, so I think it is not a problem with the LAN or something. I tried writing with Windows 7 on SMB and also tried writing with Ubuntu on NFS, both gave me the 10.5Mb/s average. The thing what's seeming odd to me is that the activity-indicator-LEDs on the drive bay show activity for 3-4 seconds, then there is no writing or reading activity for 3-4 seconds, and then the writing continues. So there are time intervals where both harddisks do nothing. I already read the guide to increase performance, but that didn't help. And of course I know that it is normal that writing-performance is significantly slower than the reading performance, because every write results in several reads etc. But shouldn't it give me at least 20 or 25Mb/s when writing? Parity Check Speed begins at 130 Mb/s and drops slowly (end of the disk) to about 80-90Mb/s. Has anybody an idea why I am getting those slow writing-speeds? Best regards, Pascal