I have ZFS pool - raidz1 with 1 dev and 3 devices.

I would like to add one more device to make it 1 dev and 4 devices, the same raidz1.

Is it possible? And how to do that in unraid?

I know simple solution - remove pool and create new one, but I expected in Unraid 7.2 beta should be something that can help me.

Thanks in advance!

Edited October 4, 2025Oct 4 by d3m3zs

What I think:

1. Stop Array

2. zpool add <pool_name> raidz1 <new_disk>

3. Start Array.

9 hours ago, d3m3zs said:

Is it possible? And how to do that in unraid?

It's possible with 7.2

https://docs.unraid.net/unraid-os/release-notes/7.2.0/#storage

On 10/5/2025 at 7:04 AM, JorgeB said:

It's possible with 7.2

https://docs.unraid.net/unraid-os/release-notes/7.2.0/#storage

Hey JorgeB,
I am also playing around with the expansion feature in my virtual test environment. I've created a single vdev with two devices (10GB each, RAIDZ1). After pool creation Unraid is showing a total size of 10GB in GUI, that's expected.
If I now add another 10GB drive, the total size is 15GB only instead of 20GB in total. Any idea if that's the way it suppose to be?

Thanks!

15 hours ago, cyp2k said:

If I now add another 10GB drive, the total size is 15GB only instead of 20GB in total. Any idea if that's the way it suppose to be?

This is a known zfs issue; it will report the stats based on the old parity-to-data ratio, see here for more info: https://forums.unraid.net/topic/46802-faq-for-unraid-v6/page/4/#findComment-1537164

On 10/5/2025 at 8:04 AM, JorgeB said:

It's possible with 7.2

https://docs.unraid.net/unraid-os/release-notes/7.2.0/#storage

Thank you, it works, but I found weird behavior, let me explain:

I have "data" share folder on Array, which has Mover action: Cache-Array

When I try to add new element to path "/data/games/..." as one of SMB User Account (I have Read/Write access) - I see "no access" dialog in Windows 11, previously (before expand) I didn`t have such problem.

Edited October 10, 2025Oct 10 by d3m3zs

I don't see how that can be related to the pool expansion, but post the diagnostics to take a look, also the output from:

ls -la /mnt/user/data

4 hours ago, JorgeB said:

I don't see how that can be related to the pool expansion, but post the diagnostics to take a look, also the output from:

ls -la /mnt/user/data

Sure, thanks! Maybe it is coincidence, but weird.

ls -la /mnt/user/data

total 22

drwxrwxrwx 1 nobody users 3 Oct 10 21:59 ./

drwxrwxrwx 1 nobody users 19 Oct 10 21:59 ../

-rw-rw-rw- 1 nobody users 10244 Jul 14 09:43 .DS_Store

drwxrwxrwx 1 nobody users 4096 Oct 4 09:01 data/

drwxrwxrwx 1 nobody users 2 Oct 5 20:53 games/

drwxrwxrwx 1 nobody users 4096 Oct 8 21:45 software/

blackbox-diagnostics-20251011-0103.zip

Permissions look fine, does it work if you set the share to public?

10 hours ago, JorgeB said:

Permissions look fine, does it work if you set the share to public?

Nope

And after I exit from folder and tried to open again

Edited October 11, 2025Oct 11 by d3m3zs

After a few changes permissions and manually run /etc/rc.d/rc.samba restart finally was able to create objects. Weird RC1.

19 hours ago, d3m3zs said:

When I try to add new element to path "/data/games/..." as one of SMB User Account (I have Read/Write access) - I see "no access" dialog in Windows 11, previously (before expand) I didn`t have such problem.

Welcome to the club!

I have reported this Bug already a few days ago, no "solution" yet...

But a "please test"

59 minutes ago, MAM59 said:

Welcome to the club!

I have reported this Bug already a few days ago, no "solution" yet...

But a "please test"

Oh thank you! I already tried everything and thought maybe zfs related, then maybe ext4 related...

4 minutes ago, d3m3zs said:

maybe zfs related, then maybe ext4 related...

More likely it is SMB related :-)

21 hours ago, MAM59 said:

More likely it is SMB related :-)

I will try also smb3 directory leases = no

And didn`t help

Edited October 12, 2025Oct 12 by d3m3zs

Hmm, for me it looks that it works (already a day and more without any error message).

Does it work LATER ? for me it needed sometimes two or three retries, then the error vanished.

If it stays forever, your problem might be of a different kind, but they look very alike...

1 hour ago, MAM59 said:

Hmm, for me it looks that it works (already a day and more without any error message).

Does it work LATER ? for me it needed sometimes two or three retries, then the error vanished.

If it stays forever, your problem might be of a different kind, but they look very alike...

I downgraded to 7.1.4 and see no issue, I suppose it is not only related to samba, but also related to my data drive which was in ext4 format.

So, 7.2 is absolutely unready for production, but many people write on reddit "no issues, so far" americans...

1 minute ago, d3m3zs said:

unready for production, but many people write on reddit "no issues, so far" americans...

Besides that annoyance, I have no issues so far, and, I'm (glad) not (to be) american :-)

Is that share the only one with the issue, i.e., does it work if you create a new share?

Just now, JorgeB said:

Is that share the only one with the issue, i.e., does it work if you create a new share?

You are asking me or the original author?

in my case ALL shares were affected, some more, some less (mainly depending on how many subfolders and levels are contained in the share).

Of course, the more there are, the more often it happened.

Edited October 13, 2025Oct 13 by MAM59

34 minutes ago, MAM59 said:

You are asking me or the original author?

The author.

2 hours ago, JorgeB said:

Is that share the only one with the issue, i.e., does it work if you create a new share?

Yes, only with one share "data" that on ext4 drive.

OK, so that share initially goes to a zfs pool, and then secondary is an ext4 array drive, is this correct? If yes, do you only have issues accessing files/folders that already exist on the array, or also for new/existing folders that only exist on the pool for now?

Just now, JorgeB said:

OK, so that share initially goes to a zfs pool, and then secondary is an ext4 array drive, is this correct? If yes, do you only have issues accessing files/folders that already exist on the array, or also for new/existing folders that only exist on the pool for now?

It is correct. On pool data dataset is empty (because of mover) and I could not create anything, so technically it is related to ext4 drive itself.

If I am not mistaken (again because of mover) - root user has all rights without issues, issue only related to both users that I have with read/write rights.

OK thnaks, I'll see if I can reproduce it.