August 5, 201114 yr Author When using user share & fill-up method whenever any drive dips below threshold, windows will report both incorrect total size & free space on mapped share 16 drives fill up 25,000,000 min free space split 0 when any drive is > 25 gb windows reports 12.9 TB / 1.87 TB ... total / used space (the correct amount) any drive dips < 25; > 24 windows reports 12.0 / 1.78 any drive dips < 24; > 23 windows reports 10.6 / 1.74 any drive dips < 23; > 22 windows reports 9.77 / 1.69 any drive dips < 22; > 21 windows reports 2.72 / 1.57 (2.72 not a typo) Once drive space increases to above 'min free space' threshold normal readings appear. Incorrect reading continued on another unraid 5.0b10 server using split 3. Bother servers migrated from a 4.7 environment with no change in settings and not displaying this behavior. - correction there is 1 change; both servers currently have no parity drive set. They did in the 4.7 environment. Will set parity, rebuild and observe This is very interesting ... I'm just starting to play with this feature with large numbers of HDDs ... I'll need to keep a close eye on this and see if I get the same problem ... thanks for the warning (and hopefully Tom can find the bug if there is one). Parity rebuild completed, behavior persists. Narrowed and can duplicate on demand. This test is on another server running 5b10: 20 data + 1 parity, no cache 1 and only 1 user share labeled 'ALL' utilizing all disks available allocation = fill up min free space = 30,000,000 split = 3 free space on all 20 disks are > 30gb; windows correctly shows 32.7 tb/ 4.58 tb (total / free) 1st disk written with 4.35gb file to < 30 gb; windows reports 31.3 / 4.55 (disk 1 = 1.5 tb) - any further writing to this disk does not affect either value beyond the expected 2nd disk written with 4.35gb to < 30 gb; windows reports 30.0 / 4.52 (disk 2 = 1.5 tb) - further writing to disk no abnormal change 3rd disk written with 4.35gb to < 30gb; windows reports 28.7 / 4.49 (disk 3 = 1.5 tb) - further writing no abnormal change Data concludes that user shares is discarding total / free space of individual disks as they fall below min free space threshold. Able to duplicate this without writting by artificially raising / lower 'min free space' of user share and noting what windows displays. Yes, sorry about that - bug fixed in next beta.
August 6, 201114 yr Hey Tom, Any chances of adopting speeding ant's "Simple Features" GUI as the main unRAID interface for 5.0 final? If you haven't considered it yet, I would like to put my vote towards strongly considering it. It's very much indicative of what UI's in today's most cutting edge web apps look like and I think would give a much better impression to unRAID as a whole (marketing wise anyway). Cheers,
August 6, 201114 yr Hi! Hey Tom, Any chances of adopting speeding ant's "Simple Features" GUI as the main unRAID interface for 5.0 final? If you haven't considered it yet, I would like to put my vote towards strongly considering it. It's very much indicative of what UI's in today's most cutting edge web apps look like and I think would give a much better impression to unRAID as a whole (marketing wise anyway). Cheers, +1 I would like to see this too. Bye.
August 6, 201114 yr If Tom want Unraid to become more popular, he really need to consider adding a few popular features from UnMenu from into Unraid... UnMenu lack of feature itself is really really silly. This is not how market should be done.
August 6, 201114 yr the 5.0 beta is already subject to enough feature-creep. a big part of 5.0 was to incorporate a plugin system, and isn't Simple Features essentially a plugin? Tom has enough on his hands keeping the core code stable as he tests kernel upgrades to squash bugs. If Tom were to seriously consider adding all these extra features himself, we'd be waiting much longer for a stable 5.0 release. As far as marketing goes, unRaid's core functionality offers features that no other product does, period. For free. It's a no-brainer to set up as a basic NAS. What more do you want?
August 6, 201114 yr There are those that believe Tom should be more focused on internals (e.g., AFP, new drivers, P+Q parity speed improvements), rather than GUI enhancements (and remember the 5.0 GUI is new and much improved over 4.x!). Tom's plug in architecture will hopefullly provide ways for community GUIs, like speeding_ant's excellent contribution, to be more easily incorporated. But distributing community addons (even preclear) is not something Tom has done in the past, and there are some sticky issues there from ownership and support perspective. I doubt we will see it happen. There are enough beta issues related to parity checks, NIC drivers, free space, etc. reported that we should allow Tom to stay focused on those and similar issues in this thread. I believe this discussion including community GUIs in the std distribution belongs in the feature requests thread, and timing should be at a calmer time in the development cycle to avoid distracting the chief cook!
August 6, 201114 yr the 5.0 beta is already subject to enough feature-creep. a big part of 5.0 was to incorporate a plugin system, and isn't Simple Features essentially a plugin? Tom has enough on his hands keeping the core code stable as he tests kernel upgrades to squash bugs. If Tom were to seriously consider adding all these extra features himself, we'd be waiting much longer for a stable 5.0 release. As far as marketing goes, unRaid's core functionality offers features that no other product does, period. For free. It's a no-brainer to set up as a basic NAS. What more do you want? I agree with what has been said above. Including the CSS changes that Simple Features gives would be nice, but I think some of the extras (email notifications, etc) of Simple Features should be left to plugins by the community. Just have some patience.
August 6, 201114 yr imho the current v5 gui is fine. Start doing fancy stuff and you will end up having to test it on loads of different devices and browsers. Performance and Features. Leave the fancy gui to the modders.
August 6, 201114 yr My point wasn't to start a heated discussion.. The work that was done on Simple Features is already done, there's nothing to say Tom can't focus on the internals and have someone else focus on the externals. He did, after all, say that the GUI was very important to the face of unRAID and essentially calling out any talented people: http://lime-technology.com/forum/index.php?topic=3461.0 I'm just saying..
August 7, 201114 yr I have two dislikes about the 'simple features' gui, and I would not wish it to become the standard offering in its current state: 1) Numerical columns are left justified, whereas they are right justified in the standard interface - right justification makes it much easier to compare values. 2) The line spacing has been increased, meaning that there is less information visible to a view and necessitating more scrolling.
August 7, 201114 yr ok I have a few questions 1. is beta 11 soon to be released and am I better off to wait for 11 before I upgrade from 4.7 2. I am planning on starting fresh with my flash drive. I have the pro key but if I assign the drives correctly I should be good? btw wil be using the original flash drive figure I would start 5.0 with an empty clean install
August 7, 201114 yr Hi, I am stucked witch ACPI S3 on Beta 10. (browsed now for hours the forum) I have understood that echo -n 3 > /proc/acpi/sleep is not working anymore in 5.xx s2ram is not working starting beta4 as commented by Joe. Both packages are not available in unmeu 1.5 anymore echo -n mem >/sys/power/state stops the server working My mo-board is supporting S3 (by logfile). So: what is the actual method to set the server in S3 mode? If any tools needed, where to get them? Thanks for support
August 7, 201114 yr Hi All, I have setup a couple of shares on the cache drive and set them to: Use Cache disk: Only Export: Yes Security: Public In the shares overview these shares have an orange bullit instead of a green one. I cant see the shares on my mac finder, i can see the shares that have a green bullit in the overview Is this by design that i can not see the shares when connected as Guest I wanted to share a couple of folders on the cache drive, i use these folders for SABnzbd. Thx for the great work on unRAID Rob.
August 7, 201114 yr A bug with the TimeMachine size limit. It appears that unRAID parses the number and inserts a space every 3 numbers. Eg, 428 600 This causes the limit to be 428Mb, and the share is renamed under Finder to be called "600".
August 8, 201114 yr I don't know if this a bug or something else but: I moved everything that was in a "Time-Machine" share to the root of the disk (disk 1) in this case. I deleted the "Time-Machine" share. But now the Time machine sparse bundle and other folders (What was in the Time-Machine share) in the root of disk 1 show up as user shares!?!? Whats going on here!? Edit 3: Adding disk 1 to the exclude from user shares has fixed it... *is happy now* Edit: Also my mover isn't running. Doesn't do it automatically. Runs fine when I click it to make it run tho. Edit 2: Seems to be fixed in the next beta!
August 8, 201114 yr Just in case Tom only has time to monitor this thread for beta-related issues, here is a link to my post re: beta10 parity check issues!
August 8, 201114 yr But now the Time machine sparse bundle and other folders (What was in the Time-Machine share) in the root of disk 1 show up as user shares!?!? Not a bug. Any folder in the root of a disk is a user share....
August 8, 201114 yr Hi All, I have setup a couple of shares on the cache drive and set them to: Use Cache disk: Only Export: Yes Security: Public In the shares overview these shares have an orange bullit instead of a green one. I cant see the shares on my mac finder, i can see the shares that have a green bullit in the overview Is this by design that i can not see the shares when connected as Guest I wanted to share a couple of folders on the cache drive, i use these folders for SABnzbd. Thx for the great work on unRAID Rob. - An orange bullet means the user share has files still on the cache drive. - I'm not sure if cache-only user shares have been implemented yet into unRAID. - If you'd like to view the contents of your cache drive, set your cache drive for Export: Yes, Security: Public -- not the shares. You'll be able to see the cache drive under Samba (not AFP) - Public means Guest will have read/write access.
August 8, 201114 yr - An orange bullet means the user share has files still on the cache drive. - I'm not sure if cache-only user shares have been implemented yet into unRAID. - If you'd like to view the contents of your cache drive, set your cache drive for Export: Yes, Security: Public -- not the shares. You'll be able to see the cache drive under Samba (not AFP) - Public means Guest will have read/write access. The "cache-only" share feature was added on 5.0-beta8.
August 8, 201114 yr But now the Time machine sparse bundle and other folders (What was in the Time-Machine share) in the root of disk 1 show up as user shares!?!? Not a bug. Any folder in the root of a disk is a user share.... That explains it then. All ok here then
August 8, 201114 yr Not a bug. Any folder in the root of a disk is a user share.... That explains it then. All ok here then ... but you can turn off the exporting of any unwanted shares.
August 9, 201114 yr Not a bug. Any folder in the root of a disk is a user share.... That explains it then. All ok here then ... but you can turn off the exporting of any unwanted shares. By adding the disk to the excluded user shares or by a different method? (Not that it matters at the moment but for future reference - i've done the former for disk 1 which is my T-M disk)
August 9, 201114 yr ... but you can turn off the exporting of any unwanted shares. By adding the disk to the excluded user shares or by a different method? (Not that it matters at the moment but for future reference - i've done the former for disk 1 which is my T-M disk) By setting 'Export:' to 'No' in the management screen for each individual share.
August 9, 201114 yr Anyone else notice that /mnt/user0 seems to disappear every now and then? Just got back from work and noticed it was no longer there...
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.