Hi, I read that user0 implementation is deprecated but I want to check if something I am doing has unknown consequences. I have a test share "test", which is set to Array Only. I have a manually spun up docker container that has a barebone ubuntu image with encfs installed. I run it from the command line and run the encfs command via docker exec to prevent an encryption password being stored in a config somewhere. I have the permissions and bind-mount propagation set to what I believe is the proper settings. the /mnt/user/test/enc and dec folders are synced properly inside and outside the docker. If I peek in /mnt/user0/test, both enc and dec folders are there, all the enc files are there BUT the dec folder is empty. I suspect this is related to encfs somehow but I don't even know what /user0 is doing to be a "mirror" of /user but without cache files. Anyway, since user0 is deprecated, do I really even care? Can anyone point out a blind spot I have on this before I try to utilize this encrypted folder? 
THANKS!

Although you have the test share set to Array Only, have you confirmed that the cache disk does not already include files/folders for that share?

 

That setting will only ensure *new* files and folders will be created in the array.  I will not prevent existing files and folders already on the cache drive for that share from appearing in the share.

50 minutes ago, nowhere99 said:

Hi, I read that user0 implementation is deprecated but I want to check if something I am doing has unknown consequences. I have a test share "test", which is set to Array Only. I have a manually spun up docker container that has a barebone ubuntu image with encfs installed. I run it from the command line and run the encfs command via docker exec to prevent an encryption password being stored in a config somewhere. I have the permissions and bind-mount propagation set to what I believe is the proper settings. the /mnt/user/test/enc and dec folders are synced properly inside and outside the docker. If I peek in /mnt/user0/test, both enc and dec folders are there, all the enc files are there BUT the dec folder is empty. I suspect this is related to encfs somehow but I don't even know what /user0 is doing to be a "mirror" of /user but without cache files. Anyway, since user0 is deprecated, do I really even care? Can anyone point out a blind spot I have on this before I try to utilize this encrypted folder? 
THANKS!

/user is a fuse of all drives.

/user0 is just folders/files on the array.

 

Originally used by mover to move files from cache to array,

Thanks all. I know you're probably used to all the "what's the diff between user and user0" questions but that's not really my question. My question is about a newly created file, created long after the share was set to primary Array, secondary nothing. Whenever ANY FILE or FOLDER is created by any means in the decrypted folder while encfs is running in the docker, that file or folder is visible in /mnt/user but NOT visible in /mnt/user0 (incidentally,  it also not visible in /mnt/cache either). So this is a case where a file is orphaned to show ONLY in the /mnt/user tree and not the other two.  A side note: If I shut down encfs, and then create a file in that exact same folder, it IS visible in /mnt/user0 (but still not /mnt/cache because it's not supposed to be). 

 

My SUSPICION is that since user0 is deprecated, devs aren't spending any time on it (rightly so) and in this encfs case, that clearly can contol what is visible in a folder by some magic I don't know, just hasn't been accounted for in whatever code would normally make a file visible in user0. 

 

Again, I AM curious why, BUT the real question is do I care that a newly create file on a long time set ARRAY only share can for whatever reason show in /mnt/user but NOT show in /mnt/user0.

 

And accept my gratitude for all the work you all spend on developing and entertaining our questions here!

2 hours ago, remotevisitor said:

Although you have the test share set to Array Only, have you confirmed that the cache disk does not already include files/folders for that share?

 

That setting will only ensure *new* files and folders will be created in the array.  I will not prevent existing files and folders already on the cache drive for that share from appearing in the share.

This was a good suggestion and originally that was the case. The folders in question had been created with a mv command from a share on cache to a share on array. Linux just decided it will work to just rename the file instead of actually moving anything. And normally it does except with Unraid, that renames the file name but not the path since it's physically on the same drive space. Results in a folder that's physically on a cache drive even tho Unraid share is set to array only.  But it doesn't account for new files being generated and not visible on user0 even tho they are physically on the array and not cache.

Edited July 13, 20241 yr by nowhere99

Actually this is a case when the deprecated /mnt/user0 can still be useful.

 

As you mention if you have a file on the cache drive is in another share and you move it to your /mnt/user/test share, Unraid counter-intuitively renames it and leaves it on the cache drive.   It can do this because the cache drive is included in the share in /mnt/user/test.

 

However, if you instead move it to your /mnt/user0/test share, it will correctly move the file into the array, rather than just renaming it.  It must do this because the cache drive is not included in your /mnt/user0/test share.

Edited July 13, 20241 yr by remotevisitor

It's just bugging me out that I have files in this ONE encfs folder, physically on the array, with no signs of it on the cache but it only is visible in /mnt/user, You cannot see it in /mnt/user0. Encfs must somehow be hiding it by not allowing it to be visible in whatever replication scheme unraid is using to have a /mnt/user0...