unRAID Server Release 5.0-rc1 Available


Recommended Posts

we have all paid good money for a license here....and to be forced to stick with a unfinished beta code is UNACCEPTABLE...........

 

You paid for an unRaid License. You paid for 4.7, not beta code.

 

No one is FORCING you to use beta code.

 

Whenever 5.x becomes final, then you'll have a FREE UPGRADE (not written in stone that I'm aware of but has been Tom's past practice).

How many software companies do that? Very very few.

 

What is UNACCEPTABLE is your ENTITLEMENT mentality.

 

No wonder the world is going to hell in a hand basket.

 

I concurred!

Link to comment
  • Replies 331
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Does anyone know if the SMB changes in RC1 fix the problems with robocopy?

 

In the betas, robocopy fails after moving the first file in a batch with the following error message:

 

2012/04/28 11:06:06 ERROR 5 (0x00000005) Changing File Attributes \\INARA\UserShare\

Access is denied.

 

Then it just retries and always gets the same message.

 

*Don't jump on me, I'm just asking the question so that I don't have to try the RC and then revert back to 4.7 again.  :)

Link to comment

Does anyone know if the SMB changes in RC1 fix the problems with robocopy?

 

In the betas, robocopy fails after moving the first file in a batch with the following error message:

 

2012/04/28 11:06:06 ERROR 5 (0x00000005) Changing File Attributes \\INARA\UserShare\

Access is denied.

 

Then it just retries and always gets the same message.

 

*Don't jump on me, I'm just asking the question so that I don't have to try the RC and then revert back to 4.7 again.  :)

I use robocopy with no issues on b6-B14. it sounds like you are trying to set NTSF permissions in your script.

 

I'll try and move one of my M1015's to a test box now that I have a pile of spare 160GB drives and see if i can get a syslog for Tom.

I was really hoping for the LSI fix in this release since it was one of the biggest issues out there..

Link to comment

we have all paid good money for a license here....and to be forced to stick with a unfinished beta code is UNACCEPTABLE...........

 

[move]While I will not defend Tom's silence for months on end[/move], I think the above is unfair.

 

I'm disappointed in the delays too - but I'm not aware of any formal guarantee that all future versions are free upgrades.  I am very happy that new versions are free, and do not consider it something he legally owes us.  (Or even morally)

 

+1

 

there is VERY few software programs out there that have free lifetime upgrades SO relax and enjoy 4.7 cause that's what you paid for....

 

actually there are quite alot of software with lifetime licenses.....and besides that... i paid for unraid as a whole from 4.7 to whenevr it stops being free for upgrades............if tom wishes to charge for the 5.0 upgrade that would be fine if it worked.......if 5.0 was to be a paid upgrade it would have been announced at the beginning of the beta....

 

im just stating that a main issue here is the lsi cards.....and it just seems that there is no internal testing being done for them at all....and since there are ALOT of people using the lsi cards it would be a priority......

 

not trying to start a war here......just stating that if nfs is messed up and lsi cards dont work in newer kernels why continue to update to them?

 

also the fact that users on the forum have released beta 14 with the new kernel and others users stated that the same problems exsist...why put it in the RC1????

 

 

Link to comment

we have all paid good money for a license here....and to be forced to stick with a unfinished beta code is UNACCEPTABLE...........

 

[move]While I will not defend Tom's silence for months on end[/move], I think the above is unfair.

 

I'm disappointed in the delays too - but I'm not aware of any formal guarantee that all future versions are free upgrades.  I am very happy that new versions are free, and do not consider it something he legally owes us.  (Or even morally)

 

+1

 

there is VERY few software programs out there that have free lifetime upgrades SO relax and enjoy 4.7 cause that's what you paid for....

 

actually there are quite alot of software with lifetime licenses.....and besides that... i paid for unraid as a whole from 4.7 to whenevr it stops being free for upgrades............if tom wishes to charge for the 5.0 upgrade that would be fine if it worked.......if 5.0 was to be a paid upgrade it would have been announced at the beginning of the beta....

 

im just stating that a main issue here is the lsi cards.....and it just seems that there is no internal testing being done for them at all....and since there are ALOT of people using the lsi cards it would be a priority......

 

not trying to start a war here......just stating that if nfs is messed up and lsi cards dont work in newer kernels why continue to update to them?

 

also the fact that users on the forum have released beta 14 with the new kernel and others users stated that the same problems exsist...why put it in the RC1????

 

have you not read that the lsi cards are a kernel problem so that's out of  limetech's control as far as i knoiw

Link to comment

this might not be the right thread but tell me all the complainers including myself, THERE IS NOTHING OUT THERE THAT CAN TOUCH UNRAID...

so where will you go once you are finished threatening with all your threads ?

 

there is ONLY ONE THING OUT THERE ZFS!!!!!!!!!!!! but it does not have most of the features of unRAID and it definitely has a few unique features ... don't like the fact that you need same size disks or else i might have used it.... EON for FTW

Link to comment

Why not get a new card?

LSI is one of the number one selling cards and the most popular Chipset in the world right now. In some countries, this is the only option they have.

 

They are also one of the most popular cards in unraid. Tom even went out of his way to make sure they worked well and were stable. Because of this, many people switched to them or bought them for new builds because they are "supported cards".

 

to just say "buy a new card" is pretty unacceptable. Many people don't have choices or for their build, it is the only card that is compatible. They are not going to toss out up to 3 perfectly working cards per server for some older, slower technology (spending hundreds of dollars in the process).

You might as well say, toss out your sandybridge and get a old LGA755 build.

 

Link to comment

have you not read that the lsi cards are a kernel problem so that's out of  limetech's control as far as i knoiw

 

I have not been able to reporduce issues using a LSI card under ubuntu 12.04 (Kernel 3.2.14).  It appears that the issue is related to the drive going through the driver in unraid or the way unraid puts the drive in spindown.

 

Can anyone else with a LSI card test this?

Link to comment

Not trying to start anything, I was just asking.  But if it works in 4.7 fine than stick with 4.7 till 5 is ready for you.  I have an issue when people start telling Tom what to do.  They did this with adding 3TB support and now people are complaining about certain things not working for them.  Beta's are called a beta for a reason.  I would rather see 5 come out of beta and be stable, then see more features/drivers added in 5.1.

 

LSI cards might be the number one card but if they don't work with unRaid what good are they?  I would hate to see my card stop working in a future version but if it would happen I would buy a new card/whatever to make it work. 

 

I know nothing about programing or Linux but I do respect everyone that does and realize some things can take time. I'm sure it will get fixed, just not as fast as some would like.

 

 

Link to comment

Why not get a new card?

 

LSI is built onto my and many other's enterprise level Server motherboard(s).

 

As far as the LSI issue not being an unRAID issue, the point everyone seems to be overlooking is how it's up to Limetech to select what version of the kernel to use. Many of us would be satisfied if Limetech simply made an RC/Final 5.0 using a STABLE Linux 3.0.x kernel.

 

I wonder if perhaps the code that unRAID uses to spin-up the drives might be at fault. One way of testing this is to have the drives-spun down and then use external tools to spinup drives.

Link to comment

OK I have some questions.

 

1: Can someone provide a list of current known bugs that 5.0-RC1 does NOT address/fix. As far as I am aware the only known bug is:

- LSI Controller card support

 

2: Is this the only known issue? Basically hardware support? As far as I am aware 5.0-RC1 fixes the 2 major bugs in 4.7 final release which were Kernel faults as well. In fact this was fixed in an earlier 5.0 beta. Correct?

 

3: Will it be simple and supported to upgrade 5.0-RC1 to any FINAL release keeping data intact?

 

4: Overall, is there any known reason NOT to go with 5.0-RC1 right now?

 

 

With regard to LSI supported cards, I just had a quick look on a well known UK supplier of computer hardware, and 8 port cards are available from 5 manufacturers:

 

Areca

Highpoint

LSI

Lycom

Supermicro

 

Is there any reason LSI would be beneficial/preferred over the others? I would assume not. I know this does not help or make current LSI owners feel good, but for someone who is yet to buy hardware and has a choice of the above, I would assume there is no disadvantage to chosing manufacturers other than LSI?

Link to comment

Not trying to start anything, I was just asking.  But if it works in 4.7 fine than stick with 4.7 till 5 is ready for you.  I have an issue when people start telling Tom what to do.  They did this with adding 3TB support and now people are complaining about certain things not working for them.  Beta's are called a beta for a reason.  I would rather see 5 come out of beta and be stable, then see more features/drivers added in 5.1.

 

LSI cards might be the number one card but if they don't work with unRaid what good are they?  I would hate to see my card stop working in a future version but if it would happen I would buy a new card/whatever to make it work. 

 

I know nothing about programing or Linux but I do respect everyone that does and realize some things can take time. I'm sure it will get fixed, just not as fast as some would like.

 

+1 for this and to add to this is if the card is not working then the conundrum exists as follows unRAID is a product that has a long list of incompatible hardware and compatible hardware so enjoy the fact that it did or did not work and move on OR wait .... or get compatible hardware as i did [Lian-Li IB-01] and move on ...!!

Link to comment

Not trying to start anything, I was just asking.  But if it works in 4.7 fine than stick with 4.7 till 5 is ready for you.  I have an issue when people start telling Tom what to do.  They did this with adding 3TB support and now people are complaining about certain things not working for them.  Beta's are called a beta for a reason.  I would rather see 5 come out of beta and be stable, then see more features/drivers added in 5.1.

 

LSI cards might be the number one card but if they don't work with unRaid what good are they?  I would hate to see my card stop working in a future version but if it would happen I would buy a new card/whatever to make it work. 

 

I know nothing about programing or Linux but I do respect everyone that does and realize some things can take time. I'm sure it will get fixed, just not as fast as some would like.

Sorry, I was not trying to start a heated discussion.

 

I was pointing out that these were at one point a supported card for beta builds. there was even a beta release specifically to add support for these cards to unraid.

These cards do not work in 4.7 due to the age of 4.7 and lack of drivers. (a lot of the hardware that is compatible with 4.7 is no longer bring made, hard to find or just not a logical investment these days due to overpricing on older hardware. Especially overseas. people have been using the beta's to use modern alternatives. Lets get away from PCI based builds)

many people have no alternatives.

I had even forgotten that some builds have the LSI chipset on the motherboard.

This is not a new issue. Tom was even part of the open discussion back when it was reported in B13. It is not something that can just fall under the radar.

 

Trust me. I am aware this is not Toms fault that it is broken.  But, it should be fixable. It has been a long time that this is has plagued unRAID betas. I have no problem sending him one of my spare M1015's to test with.

 

If supermicro stopped creating the SASLP-MV8 today, that would seriously cripple unRAID if it did not have support for other chipsets.

 

Link to comment

It is the fault of unRaid code. And Tom has showed clearly just how much time he puts into the project. First by not producing in the timeline he has spoken about and secondly to ask what post, when it was clearly brought up MANY time in many beta's and many spent the time to post their syslogs. Shame on you Tom. To spend 30mins on a kernel update and marking as RC to make the community believe v5 has the major bugs worked out...

 

To those who believe there are no other products out there like unRAID, your right they actually work, there is support with timelines, and their betas don't last years. Yes some have weak points & some have stronger points in certain areas. A cool idea is only cool for so long. And all this is just not cool.

 

One of unRaid strong points is (was) in sleeping drives, and really needs either a full rewrite or overhaul in that code.

Link to comment

For those with a m1015/br10i,

 

A) If the drives are never spun down, does everything work?

 

B) try this experiment:

 

- Stop the array

 

- note device id of one of the data drives attached to a m1015/br10i (for purposes of this post, let's say its "sdc").

 

- now type this sequence using above device id:

 

mkdir /x

mount /dev/sdc1 /x

ls /x                                  <--- should list your top level dirs here

hdparm -y /dev/sdc          <--- should spin down drive

ls -R /x                              <--- should spin up and list all files on the disk

umount /x

 

Let me know if this sequence works and does not produce any syslog entries.

 

Link to comment

And yes there are quite a few bugs still lurking, Tom should go back a read thought the posts as well all have to and do, as I for one don't plan to put it all on a silver platter in one post, just so maybe he decides to read and do something about it. You get back what you give.

Link to comment

Hi,

 

The fix:

Revert the used Linux Kernel to ANY of the 3.0.x series. For example, I have customized unRAID 5.0 beta 14 working nicely with the Linux Kernel 3.0.8.

 

FYI: Linux Kernel 3.3.4 was released yesterday, April 27th. It includes fixes for NFS and some for MD.

 

I'm having a SuperMicro card which is actually an LSI 1068 chipset. As it use the mptsas driver, I assume I would have the same issue going on B13,B14 and RC1, right?

 

Is the custom kernel you made something you can distribute and that we can replace easily on the USB key compared to what is installed by default with B14/RC1? If it is doable, I would prefer this option then trying to create my own kernel. I've done that a few years ago and it worked (I actually installed unraid on Salix at that time) but... I remember it was a long process and I don't have the time for this anymore.

 

Let me know if this is possible to distribute at all or if we really have to create our own kernel.

 

Thank you.

 

ehfortin

Link to comment

Why not get a new card?

 

LSI is built onto my and many other's enterprise level Server motherboard(s).

 

As far as the LSI issue not being an unRAID issue, the point everyone seems to be overlooking is how it's up to Limetech to select what version of the kernel to use. Many of us would be satisfied if Limetech simply made an RC/Final 5.0 using a STABLE Linux 3.0.x kernel.

 

I wonder if perhaps the code that unRAID uses to spin-up the drives might be at fault. One way of testing this is to have the drives-spun down and then use external tools to spinup drives.

 

Reverting back to a 3.0 kernel will break a bunch of other hardware support, then I'll have a completely different set of people yelling at me.

 

As is apparent I've been more-or-less ignoring this LSI issue for these reasons:

- these cards were very expensive when they first came out, so I never purchased one

- lots of talk on various forums of people re-flashing the cards, so I thought the issue might go away on it's own

- lots of talk on various forums of it working on some kernels, and not on others, so I thought a kernel update might solve the issue

- LSI is notorious for requiring download of their custom driver, though apparently this is not the case here

- very few support emails complaining of this issue (far more emails for other issues)

 

I'm thinking now this is an unRaid-specific problem, not linux problem, so if you have this card, please see my previous post and we'll figure out what's happening.

 

 

Also - unRaid uses the 'hdparm -y' command to spin down a drive.  Read/write commands are just sent to a spun-down drive and it's up to the drive to spin up, so this is a strange problem...

Link to comment

Why not get a new card?

 

LSI is built onto my and many other's enterprise level Server motherboard(s).

 

As far as the LSI issue not being an unRAID issue, the point everyone seems to be overlooking is how it's up to Limetech to select what version of the kernel to use. Many of us would be satisfied if Limetech simply made an RC/Final 5.0 using a STABLE Linux 3.0.x kernel.

 

I wonder if perhaps the code that unRAID uses to spin-up the drives might be at fault. One way of testing this is to have the drives-spun down and then use external tools to spinup drives.

 

Reverting back to a 3.0 kernel will break a bunch of other hardware support, then I'll have a completely different set of people yelling at me.

 

As is apparent I've been more-or-less ignoring this LSI issue for a these reasons:

- these cards were very expensive when they first came out, so I never purchased one

- lots of talk on various forums of people re-flashing the cards, so I thought the issue might go away on it's own

- lots of talk on various forums of it working on some kernels, and not on others, so I thought a kernel update might solve the issue

- LSI is notorious for requiring download of their custom driver, though apparently this is not the case here

- very few support emails complaining of this issue (far more emails for other issues)

 

I'm thinking now this is an unRaid-specific problem, not linux problem, so if you have this card, please see my previous post and we'll figure out what's happening.

Tom,

 

Would it in anyway help you if I mailed you an already flashed M1015 for testing?

 

John

 

PS. you can find them for $65 if you hunt around. or at least you could 2 month ago.

Link to comment

I think they can still be had for under $85 with bracket.  This is the IBM M1015 flashed as LSI2008.  Excellent card.  I'm sticking with beta 12a.  I for one don't have a real issue with that because EVERYTHING works for me but I understand peoples' frustrations.  It feels odd to be running 12a as prod but it's very stable.

 

Tomm,

I too have an extra M1015/LSI 2008 card I can mail you to test.  Please PM me with where you want it sent.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.