January 30Jan 30 Community Expert 27 minutes ago, JorgeB said:Should not be possible in this case, unless the primary partition already starts at the beginning of the diskDoes this mean sdm can be repartitioned in place?
January 30Jan 30 Community Expert 16 minutes ago, Moker-Vet said:fdisk -l /dev/sdmThis one is basically using the whole disk, don't think it's worth reformatting just because of that.
January 30Jan 30 Community Expert Probably this is more useful: [name] => parity [device] => sdad [id] => ST4000VN008-2DR166_ZDH9T9YW [format] => GPT: 4KiB-aligned [name] => disk1 [device] => sdaa [id] => ST4000NM0023_Z1Z3A74J_35000c500581798d3 [format] => GPT: custom [name] => disk2 [device] => sdaf [id] => ST4000NM0023_Z1Z8EDZL_35000c5008347f6bf [format] => GPT: custom [name] => disk3 [device] => sdj [id] => ST4000NM0023_Z1Z45M0S_35000c50058a80177 [format] => GPT: 4KiB-aligned [name] => disk4 [device] => sdo [id] => ST4000NM0023_Z1Z45MTH_35000c50058a7e4e7 [format] => GPT: custom [name] => disk5 [device] => sdn [id] => ST4000NM0023_Z1Z45MZC_35000c50058a7e07b [format] => GPT: custom [name] => disk6 [device] => sdz [id] => ST4000NM0023_Z1Z45SCY_35000c50058a7793b [format] => GPT: 4KiB-aligned [name] => disk7 [device] => sdu [id] => ST4000NM0023_Z1Z45SN9_35000c50058a73d5f [format] => GPT: 4KiB-aligned [name] => disk8 [device] => sdt [id] => ST4000NM0023_Z1Z45TFG_35000c50058a80fe3 [format] => GPT: custom [name] => disk9 [device] => sdr [id] => ST4000VN008-2DR166_ZDH9TMTY [format] => GPT: 4KiB-aligned [name] => disk10 [device] => sdd [id] => ST2000LM007-1R8174_WDZH3P3N [format] => MBR: custom [name] => disk11 [device] => sdae [id] => ST4000VN008-2DR166_ZGY7141D [format] => GPT: custom [name] => disk12 [device] => sdm [id] => ST4000VN008-2DR166_ZDH9T8VB [format] => GPT: custom [name] => disk13 [device] => sds [id] => ST4000VN008-2DR166_ZDH9S4G9 [format] => GPT: custom [name] => disk14 [device] => sdy [id] => ST4000VN008-2DR166_ZGY6SMZH [format] => GPT: custom
January 30Jan 30 Community Expert Is there one or more disks showing much less capacity than they should? If there is, those should be reformatted; disks that have multiple partitions but are just missing 2 or 4GB not sure if it's worth it.
January 30Jan 30 Community Expert @Moker-Vet Nevermind thisWhat do you get from command line with these:fdisk -l /dev/sdaa fdisk -l /dev/sdaf fdisk -l /dev/sdo fdisk -l /dev/sdn fdisk -l /dev/sdt fdisk -l /dev/sdae fdisk -l /dev/sdm fdisk -l /dev/sds fdisk -l /dev/sdy
January 30Jan 30 Community Expert Parity and disk3 both have [size] => 3907018532 So I assume that means there won't be a problem with parity being smaller than any 4TB array disk.
January 30Jan 30 Community Expert 59 minutes ago, trurl said:shfs 50T 14T 36T 28% /mnt/user0 Looks like total array capacity is 50T. Maybe some of that is multipartioned disks though./dev/sdv1 166T 79T 66T 55% /mnt/moker-vet And raid5 pool has 79T used so won't all fit on array as currently configured.
January 30Jan 30 Community Expert 22 minutes ago, JorgeB said:Is there one or more disks showing much less capacity than they should? If there is, those should be reformatted; disks that have multiple partitions but are just missing 2 or 4GB not sure if it's worth it.According to df, it looks like all 4TB array disks are showing 3.7T capacity, with the only other array disk, 2TB, showing 1.9T capacity, so maybe no reason to format anything.
January 30Jan 30 Community Expert @JorgeB3 minutes ago, trurl said:According to df, it looks like all 4TB array disks are showing 3.7T capacity, with the only other array disk, 2TB, showing 1.9T capacity, so maybe no reason to format anything.1 minute ago, trurl said:cache pool is 2x1TB zfs mirror, so that should be OK too.What about the raid5 btrfs pool moker-vet?Is there some way we can preserve its data while removing some HDDs to use in the array?Here is what I get from carfax.org.uk:https://carfax.org.uk/btrfs-usage/?c=1&slo=1&shi=100&p=1&dg=1&d=1000&d=1000&d=4000&d=4000&d=4000&d=4000&d=4000&d=20000&d=20000&d=14000&d=14000&d=16000&d=16000&d=16000&d=22000&d=22000The smaller drives (<=4TB) are SSDs.
January 30Jan 30 Community Expert 28 minutes ago, trurl said:What about the raid5 btrfs pool moker-vet?Is there some way we can preserve its data while removing some HDDs to use in the array?As long as there's enough free space, it's possible to manually remove one or more disks, it must be done using the CLI, and once one or more disks have been removed, the pool needs to be reimported to sync it up with the GUI.This FAQ entry shows how to do it:https://forums.unraid.net/topic/46802-faq-for-unraid-v6/#findComment-462135
January 30Jan 30 Community Expert 1 minute ago, JorgeB said:As long as there's enough free spaceWe could move some of its data to the array first.
January 30Jan 30 Community Expert @Moker-Vet You don't need to bother with any of those command lines I asked for.I think we have an approach decided on.I will give some detailed instructions in following posts.
January 30Jan 30 Community Expert For my benefit and anyone else following along, I have reordered the carfax from smallest to largest, with the idea that the smallest (SSDs) will not be used in the array and the largest will need to become parity. So it will be easier to remove from the page as we go.https://carfax.org.uk/btrfs-usage/?c=1&slo=1&shi=100&p=1&dg=1&d=22000&d=22000&d=20000&d=20000&d=16000&d=16000&d=16000&d=14000&d=14000&d=4000&d=4000&d=4000&d=4000&d=4000&d=1000&d=1000
January 30Jan 30 Community Expert @Moker-Vet Post new diagnostics so we can make sure we understand the current state of things.
January 30Jan 30 Community Expert Just to recap, all multipartition disks are in the array, and not missing enough space to bother with reformatting. All drives in cache and moker-vet pools are partitioned correctly as SSDs or HDDs.
January 30Jan 30 Community Expert @Moker-Vet In addition to new diagnostics, post the output of this command line (wait for it to complete)du -h -d 1 /mnt/moker-vet | sort -hr
February 3Feb 3 Author On 1/30/2026 at 5:29 PM, trurl said:@Moker-Vet Nevermind thisWhat do you get from command line with these:fdisk -l /dev/sdaa fdisk -l /dev/sdaf fdisk -l /dev/sdo fdisk -l /dev/sdn fdisk -l /dev/sdt fdisk -l /dev/sdae fdisk -l /dev/sdm fdisk -l /dev/sds fdisk -l /dev/sdyHi Trurl! i get this outputroot@Moker-Vet:~# fdisk -l /dev/sdaa fdisk -l /dev/sdaf fdisk -l /dev/sdo fdisk -l /dev/sdn fdisk -l /dev/sdt fdisk -l /dev/sdae fdisk -l /dev/sdm fdisk -l /dev/sds fdisk -l /dev/sdy Disk /dev/sdaa: 3.64 TiB, 4000787030016 bytes, 7814037168 sectors Disk model: ST4000NM0023 Units: sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 16776704 bytes Disklabel type: gpt Disk identifier: E1C614B2-30BD-458C-B782-DB9316C7E606 Device Start End Sectors Size Type /dev/sdaa1 34 2081 2048 1M Microsoft LDM metadata /dev/sdaa2 2082 32767 30686 15M Microsoft reserved /dev/sdaa3 32768 7814037134 7814004367 3.6T Microsoft LDM data Disk /dev/sdaf: 3.64 TiB, 4000787030016 bytes, 7814037168 sectors Disk model: ST4000NM0023 Units: sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 16776704 bytes Disklabel type: gpt Disk identifier: 9BC472F6-F2D9-4EAD-BE4D-BC0E5855B71A Device Start End Sectors Size Type /dev/sdaf1 34 2081 2048 1M Microsoft LDM metadata /dev/sdaf2 2082 32767 30686 15M Microsoft reserved /dev/sdaf3 32768 7814037134 7814004367 3.6T Microsoft LDM data Disk /dev/sdo: 3.64 TiB, 4000787030016 bytes, 7814037168 sectors Disk model: ST4000NM0023 Units: sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 16776704 bytes Disklabel type: gpt Disk identifier: 81E5586B-9CDE-479D-B57A-54C708BB82C0 Device Start End Sectors Size Type /dev/sdo1 34 2081 2048 1M Microsoft LDM metadata /dev/sdo2 2082 32767 30686 15M Microsoft reserved /dev/sdo3 32768 7814037134 7814004367 3.6T Microsoft LDM data Disk /dev/sdn: 3.64 TiB, 4000787030016 bytes, 7814037168 sectors Disk model: ST4000NM0023 Units: sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 16776704 bytes Disklabel type: gpt Disk identifier: 57CC1D2D-12DB-4052-A703-EB057BAD1CB6 Device Start End Sectors Size Type /dev/sdn1 34 2081 2048 1M Microsoft LDM metadata /dev/sdn2 2082 32767 30686 15M Microsoft reserved /dev/sdn3 32768 7814037134 7814004367 3.6T Microsoft LDM data Disk /dev/sdt: 3.64 TiB, 4000787030016 bytes, 7814037168 sectors Disk model: ST4000NM0023 Units: sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 16776704 bytes Disklabel type: gpt Disk identifier: C7312661-B512-4D4E-B76B-1A9392957B58 Device Start End Sectors Size Type /dev/sdt1 34 2081 2048 1M Microsoft LDM metadata /dev/sdt2 2082 32767 30686 15M Microsoft reserved /dev/sdt3 32768 7814037134 7814004367 3.6T Microsoft LDM data Disk /dev/sdae: 3.64 TiB, 4000787030016 bytes, 7814037168 sectors Disk model: ST4000VN008-2DR1 Units: sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 4096 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 4096 bytes / 16773120 bytes Disklabel type: gpt Disk identifier: 9CCD2F4E-EB54-4087-BF22-9285F9682AC4 Device Start End Sectors Size Type /dev/sdae1 2048 4982527 4980480 2.4G Linux RAID /dev/sdae2 4982528 9176831 4194304 2G Linux RAID /dev/sdae3 9437184 7813832351 7804395168 3.6T Linux RAID Disk /dev/sdm: 3.64 TiB, 4000787030016 bytes, 7814037168 sectors Disk model: ST4000VN008-2DR1 Units: sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 4096 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 4096 bytes / 16773120 bytes Disklabel type: gpt Disk identifier: D2725FB6-BD1F-4C89-ADEC-605640971625 Device Start End Sectors Size Type /dev/sdm1 2048 4982527 4980480 2.4G Linux RAID /dev/sdm2 4982528 9176831 4194304 2G Linux RAID /dev/sdm5 9453280 7813830239 7804376960 3.6T Linux RAID Disk /dev/sds: 3.64 TiB, 4000787030016 bytes, 7814037168 sectors Disk model: ST4000VN008-2DR1 Units: sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 4096 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 4096 bytes / 16773120 bytes Disklabel type: gpt Disk identifier: FC1BA328-65D1-4B1B-9441-995275B82F75 Device Start End Sectors Size Type /dev/sds1 2048 4982527 4980480 2.4G Linux RAID /dev/sds2 4982528 9176831 4194304 2G Linux RAID /dev/sds5 9453280 7813830239 7804376960 3.6T Linux RAID Disk /dev/sdy: 3.64 TiB, 4000787030016 bytes, 7814037168 sectors Disk model: ST4000VN008-2DR1 Units: sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 4096 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 4096 bytes / 16773120 bytes Disklabel type: gpt Disk identifier: 01635A6D-7B09-44CD-BDE2-A3C6D65A0DA3 Device Start End Sectors Size Type /dev/sdy1 2048 4982527 4980480 2.4G Linux RAID /dev/sdy2 4982528 9176831 4194304 2G Linux RAID /dev/sdy3 9437184 7813832351 7804395168 3.6T Linux RAID
February 3Feb 3 Author On 1/30/2026 at 8:36 PM, trurl said:@Moker-VetPost new diagnostics so we can make sure we understand the current state of things.moker-vet-diagnostics-20260203-1311.zip
February 3Feb 3 Author I want to thank all of you for the help so far! i am currently waiting for the last command to finish..but i think some screenshots can help showing what i have and have left:CACHE POOL ZFS:Primary use: fast storage for plex database, docker containers and any performance hungry application.storage pool 1: ARRAY XFSstorage pool 2: pool BTRFSthe storage pool 1 & 2 act as a storage pool for my movie files and they move the files with mover. this is not ideal and it would be great going to one.my question is, should i move it all to the array and use 2 parity disks and use a xfs? or move the array to the btrfs pool?and what should i do with the SSD disks i have? can you explain to me how i would need to set it up? is it possible that i can remove disks one by one from the btrfs pool and add them to the array? i can move one disks data content to the other disk in the BTRFS pool and then remove it and add it to the array and work like that.
February 3Feb 3 Author root@Moker-Vet:~# du -h -d 1 /mnt/moker-vet | sort -hr 80T /mnt/moker-vet 77T /mnt/moker-vet/mokervet 2.5T /mnt/moker-vet/Media-Landingzone 719G /mnt/moker-vet/Back-ups 15G /mnt/moker-vet/appdata 8.1G /mnt/moker-vet/Admin 0 /mnt/moker-vet/synology-nas 0 /mnt/moker-vet/Downloads
February 3Feb 3 Community Expert 1 hour ago, Moker-Vet said:move it all to the array and use 2 parity disks and use a xfs^thismoker-vet pool has 65T free/dev/sdv1 166T 80T 65T 56% /mnt/moker-vetwith disks ranging from 22T down to 1T:https://carfax.org.uk/btrfs-usage/?c=1&slo=1&shi=100&p=1&dg=1&d=22000&d=22000&d=20000&d=20000&d=16000&d=16000&d=16000&d=14000&d=14000&d=4000&d=4000&d=4000&d=4000&d=4000&d=1000&d=1000@JorgeBOn 1/30/2026 at 12:41 PM, JorgeB said:As long as there's enough free space, it's possible to manually remove one or more disksCan we remove 22T + 20T + 20T = 62T from moker-vet pool for reuse in the array (22T single parity with 2x20T for data) while still preserving all data in moker-vet until we can move some of it off?
February 3Feb 3 Community Expert 21 minutes ago, trurl said:Can we remove 22T + 20T + 20T = 62T from moker-vet pool for reuse in the array (22T single parity with 2x20T for data) while still preserving all data in mover-vet until we can move some of it off?Should be, there were 71T free on the last screenshot; they would need to be removed one at a time, and it will take some time to rewrite the data to the other pool devices.
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.