WeeboTech Posted May 9, 2013 Share Posted May 9, 2013 Relax guys, there's more to come. I think just from the sheer changes that have shown up before your eyes, it shows that Tom works on unRAID in one fashion or another. It's just not reflected in how some people deem it should be. I bet there will be some good news coming ahead soon. Link to comment
madburg Posted May 9, 2013 Share Posted May 9, 2013 Everything here is of Tom's own doing, period. Choose between several electronics packages. For a basic media server, an Atom-based motherboard/CPU is more than adequate. Interested in running multiple virtual machines? A more powerful Core or Xeon based motherboard is also available. No mention of the board spec's (MB/Controller/HW) to know its truly VMWare certified (CIM support, IPMI). In todays world running a Mid to Large size dedicated NAS is pointless, the curve is all about virtualization and cloud services. Sales will suffer if it is not truly virtualization certified both hardware and unRAID by Tom. Anyone see an official post stating unRAID supports being virtualized by Tom? (No adding a vmxnet driver does not quantify) unRAID has no built in email/notification and monitoring. This has been pointed out many times and no progress has been made on this. Even the simplest NAS's carry some form of these. All mid to large implementation carry notifications of degraded states, non by unRAID. Parity check are voluntary and not scheduled based; an alert to parity errors is way too late in the game, when a simple alert of a degradation for hardware component (eg. Temps, voltage, premature drive failure) would go alot further to preventive correction before hand. Includes unRAID Server OS with Pro registration. Our latest unRAID Server release supports several advanced features including a cache pool. For example, you can configure your 10 high capacity hard drives in an unRAID array, and configure 4 fast 2.5? SSD’s in a RAID-1 btrfs cache pool. Even if this was a custom or pre-release of v5.0 for anyone who bought the hardware, it is an untested feature nonetheless; one would be running in untested waters. I personally am not thrilled with the QA process I seen come from the Beta/RC's. 5.0RC12a is by far the slowest thus far, AFP is a no go, NFS has issues, SMB has a refresh problem, I can only imagine from what I have read in regards to Active Directory mode (to scared to even try down that road), and various other stuff, which all never get fixed. No proper tracking of issues, pointless to keep going... The forums blow up and Tom will post a little something to calm times down a bit.. same sh^t different day. unRAID will always be a beta no matter the label from the way its being run and this is unfortunate. Technology is growing faster than a one man show, its falling behind the curve with each day that goes by. There are many linux distro's being utilized, none go at this pace. Its always some other components issue (supposedly) but take a minute and read through the release notes and you will clearly see how much was fixed and experimented to unRAID itself at a turtles pace, and this is what was publicly noted, we don't know all of it. Last final verion 4.7 never even got patched (4.7.1), so what should we expect from 5.0 should it go final the way it is? So cache pools, sure no problem bring it on, what's the difference. He didn't have time to finish a plugin manager because 5.0 is taking too long and needs to get to final, but now we'll probably see cache pools instead, you just have to laugh. Whatever, I am enjoying the the post that come full circle... Hey Tom can you post something please, hey Tom, I have an idea, ... hey Tom, the way it should be is... 2+ years for me I feel bad to those who have be reading all this for longer (its got to be a terrible broken record.) Soon running all SSD's that are low power, low heat, take up less space and don't need to be spun down will overcome many factors, about the time unRAID maybe stable and final. P.S. Looks like speedingant designed the main http://lime-technology.com/ page looks good (no matter who designed it, may it not get defaced ever again) Link to comment
mrow Posted May 9, 2013 Share Posted May 9, 2013 Relax guys, there's more to come. I think just from the sheer changes that have shown up before your eyes, it shows that Tom works on unRAID in one fashion or another. It's just not reflected in how some people deem it should be. If this were a free product it would be one thing for people to have such expectations. But lots of people paid good money for this product and I don't it's a lot to ask for some even basic communication from Tom. Weeks go by where there isn't a single post from him and they usually don't have any kind of status update when he does post. Case in point, his most recent resurface. His posts are mostly about the new website and asking people to submit pictures he can add to a tacky slide show on the home page. Why is he spending any time and effort in this right now when he has a product that has been in beta for 3 years with no end in sight as far as any of us know? Tom has been saying it's almost ready for final for 2 years. I think unraid is a great product but JackBauer is right. This is type of crap what drives customers and advocates of the product away. To new customers it looks like Tom takes their money and then does whatever the hell he wants and works on the product whenever he feels like it. I bet there will be some good news coming ahead soon. This is another thing I find frustrating. From time to time we see statements like this from mods that seem to be hinting they know more than we do. If there is information to share why doesn't Tom come and share it instead of mods making vague statements? Link to comment
Helmonder Posted May 9, 2013 Share Posted May 9, 2013 I am really looking forward to the new release, I did some thinking on the addition of btrfs and I think it is a great step forward.. Have not been reading the forum offlate so this might be something triggering a "duh!": With BTRFS running as a kind of second array within the same server, providing fast storage but ALSO protected it makes it possible to see the unraid system as 2-level storage system, the only thing needed would be a more smart MOVER script, and that would not be to difficult to create I guess (although I could not do it). At the moment the mover script moves everything off the cache drive at a predefined period, that is needed because the cache drive is not protected. With a protected cache drive system, there is no need to move stuff off because of security, you basically want to move it off because it gets full. Now imagine the following: Mover script will move off files that have not been used for X time.. That would create two times of storage within unraid: - Fast storage, for frequently accessed files (though more expensive) - Slower storage for less frequently accessed files (and more cheap) In reality frequently used files would remain on the cache-array indefinately. Tv series you download will remain there for a few days, making it likely they have been viewed before they are moved to the "colder storage".. I can imagine this system would make sure the array drive are spun down even more. The whole basic unraid system would stay the same, making it transparant where a file is, just like now. And while Tom is creating the BTRFS cache pool, the only addition needed would be a mover script with a bit more intelligence.. Sounds nice eh ? Maybe Tom has allready created it :-) Link to comment
Dougy Posted May 9, 2013 Share Posted May 9, 2013 I am really looking forward to the new release, I did some thinking on the addition of btrfs and I think it is a great step forward.. Have not been reading the forum offlate so this might be something triggering a "duh!": With BTRFS running as a kind of second array within the same server, providing fast storage but ALSO protected it makes it possible to see the unraid system as 2-level storage system, the only thing needed would be a more smart MOVER script, and that would not be to difficult to create I guess (although I could not do it). At the moment the mover script moves everything off the cache drive at a predefined period, that is needed because the cache drive is not protected. With a protected cache drive system, there is no need to move stuff off because of security, you basically want to move it off because it gets full. Now imagine the following: Mover script will move off files that have not been used for X time.. That would create two times of storage within unraid: - Fast storage, for frequently accessed files (though more expensive) - Slower storage for less frequently accessed files (and more cheap) In reality frequently used files would remain on the cache-array indefinately. Tv series you download will remain there for a few days, making it likely they have been viewed before they are moved to the "colder storage".. I can imagine this system would make sure the array drive are spun down even more. The whole basic unraid system would stay the same, making it transparant where a file is, just like now. And while Tom is creating the BTRFS cache pool, the only addition needed would be a mover script with a bit more intelligence.. Sounds nice eh ? Maybe Tom has allready created it :-) no one said it wasn't a good idea. what is not a good idea is to add new features to a RC. Technically it means that it is not an RC but still a beta. so do the maths, this is not RC12a b or c, it is something like beta 30. I think the goal should be to reduce the number of betas, not increase them Link to comment
trurl Posted May 9, 2013 Share Posted May 9, 2013 While I look forward to further development, I feel like I have already gotten what I paid for and Tom doesn't owe me anything. Lots of companies charge for upgrades or even have some sort of "subscription" requirement. Link to comment
p.totton Posted May 9, 2013 Share Posted May 9, 2013 Everything here is of Tom's own doing, period. Choose between several electronics packages. For a basic media server, an Atom-based motherboard/CPU is more than adequate. Interested in running multiple virtual machines? A more powerful Core or Xeon based motherboard is also available. No mention of the board spec's (MB/Controller/HW) to know its truly VMWare certified (CIM support, IPMI). In todays world running a Mid to Large size dedicated NAS is pointless, the curve is all about virtualization and cloud services. Sales will suffer if it is not truly virtualization certified both hardware and unRAID by Tom. Anyone see an official post stating unRAID supports being virtualized by Tom? (No adding a vmxnet driver does not quantify) unRAID has no built in email/notification and monitoring. This has been pointed out many times and no progress has been made on this. Even the simplest NAS's carry some form of these. All mid to large implementation carry notifications of degraded states, non by unRAID. Parity check are voluntary and not scheduled based; an alert to parity errors is way too late in the game, when a simple alert of a degradation for hardware component (eg. Temps, voltage, premature drive failure) would go alot further to preventive correction before hand. Includes unRAID Server OS with Pro registration. Our latest unRAID Server release supports several advanced features including a cache pool. For example, you can configure your 10 high capacity hard drives in an unRAID array, and configure 4 fast 2.5? SSD’s in a RAID-1 btrfs cache pool. Even if this was a custom or pre-release of v5.0 for anyone who bought the hardware, it is an untested feature nonetheless; one would be running in untested waters. I personally am not thrilled with the QA process I seen come from the Beta/RC's. 5.0RC12a is by far the slowest thus far, AFP is a no go, NFS has issues, I can only imagine from what I have read in regards to Active Directory mode (to scared to even try down that road). unRAID will always be a beta no matter the label from the way its being run and this is unfortunate. Technology is growing faster than a one man show, its falling behind the curve with each day that goes by. There are many linux distro's being utilized, none go at this pace. Its always some other components issue (supposedly) but take a minute and read through the release notes and you will clearly see how much was fixed and experimented to unRAID itself at a turtles pace, and this is what was publicly noted, we don't know all of it. Soon running all SSD's that are low power, low heat, take up less space and don't need to be spun down will overcome many factors, about the time unRAID maybe stable and final. P.S. Looks like speedingant designed the main http://lime-technology.com/ page looks good (no matter who designed it, may it not get defaced ever again) Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment
p.totton Posted May 9, 2013 Share Posted May 9, 2013 Everything here is of Tom's own doing, period. Choose between several electronics packages. For a basic media server, an Atom-based motherboard/CPU is more than adequate. Interested in running multiple virtual machines? A more powerful Core or Xeon based motherboard is also available. No mention of the board spec's (MB/Controller/HW) to know its truly VMWare certified (CIM support, IPMI). In todays world running a Mid to Large size dedicated NAS is pointless, the curve is all about virtualization and cloud services. Sales will suffer if it is not truly virtualization certified both hardware and unRAID by Tom. Anyone see an official post stating unRAID supports being virtualized by Tom? (No adding a vmxnet driver does not quantify) unRAID has no built in email/notification and monitoring. This has been pointed out many times and no progress has been made on this. Even the simplest NAS's carry some form of these. All mid to large implementation carry notifications of degraded states, non by unRAID. Parity check are voluntary and not scheduled based; an alert to parity errors is way too late in the game, when a simple alert of a degradation for hardware component (eg. Temps, voltage, premature drive failure) would go alot further to preventive correction before hand. Includes unRAID Server OS with Pro registration. Our latest unRAID Server release supports several advanced features including a cache pool. For example, you can configure your 10 high capacity hard drives in an unRAID array, and configure 4 fast 2.5? SSD’s in a RAID-1 btrfs cache pool. Even if this was a custom or pre-release of v5.0 for anyone who bought the hardware, it is an untested feature nonetheless; one would be running in untested waters. I personally am not thrilled with the QA process I seen come from the Beta/RC's. 5.0RC12a is by far the slowest thus far, AFP is a no go, NFS has issues, I can only imagine from what I have read in regards to Active Directory mode (to scared to even try down that road). unRAID will always be a beta no matter the label from the way its being run and this is unfortunate. Technology is growing faster than a one man show, its falling behind the curve with each day that goes by. There are many linux distro's being utilized, none go at this pace. Its always some other components issue (supposedly) but take a minute and read through the release notes and you will clearly see how much was fixed and experimented to unRAID itself at a turtles pace, and this is what was publicly noted, we don't know all of it. Soon running all SSD's that are low power, low heat, take up less space and don't need to be spun down will overcome many factors, about the time unRAID maybe stable and final. P.S. Looks like speedingant designed the main http://lime-technology.com/ page looks good (no matter who designed it, may it not get defaced ever again) Madberg has very valid pint about AFP & NFS support.. This is something that any user with a hybrid of Computer OS would consider as important, (I know I do) Not to mention all the media steaming devices that use NFS. I have no problem with software being declared GA for a defined set of hardware. But I do have a problem with software that's not reliable with common networking protocols. This is core to the main Unraid applications of media/file serving and backup. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment
speeding_ant Posted May 9, 2013 Share Posted May 9, 2013 P.S. Looks like speedingant designed the main http://lime-technology.com/ page looks good (no matter who designed it, may it not get defaced ever again) Take that back! I design much nicer sites than this! However, the new site is better than the old one... Link to comment
madburg Posted May 9, 2013 Share Posted May 9, 2013 P.S. Looks like speedingant designed the main http://lime-technology.com/ page looks good (no matter who designed it, may it not get defaced ever again) Take that back! I design much nicer sites than this! However, the new site is better than the old one... Your "speeding_ant", I said "speedingant" (aka the imposter) But for you my friend, I take it back either way! Link to comment
speeding_ant Posted May 9, 2013 Share Posted May 9, 2013 P.S. Looks like speedingant designed the main http://lime-technology.com/ page looks good (no matter who designed it, may it not get defaced ever again) Take that back! I design much nicer sites than this! However, the new site is better than the old one... Your "speeding_ant", I said "speedingant" (aka the imposter) But for you my friend, I take it back either way! There's an imposter?! I had do a member search to make sure. You had me worried Though, actually. If the imposter can continue on my work I'd be happy. Currently no time for anything productive outside of work right now... Link to comment
archedraft Posted May 9, 2013 Share Posted May 9, 2013 I do not know how you all have waited for 5.0 for over 3 years! It has been a month and I am already checking back every couple of hours to see if anything has changed... Link to comment
BobPhoenix Posted May 9, 2013 Share Posted May 9, 2013 I do not know how you all have waited for 5.0 for over 3 years! It has been a month and I am already checking back every couple of hours to see if anything has changed... I just don't care anymore. The RC's are stable enough for me for now. Link to comment
dirtysanchez Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 I just don't care anymore. The RC's are stable enough for me for now. Granted, I've only been using unRAID since November (rc8a), but I have to agree with this. 5.0 final would be nice, but rc12a is bullet-proof stable for me. Link to comment
garycase Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 I do not know how you all have waited for 5.0 for over 3 years! It has been a month and I am already checking back every couple of hours to see if anything has changed... I just don't care anymore. The RC's are stable enough for me for now. +1 RC12a is rock-solid for everything I use it for. I am, however, a "plain vanilla" user -- just the base install plus UnMenu with the CleanPowerDown and APC UPS packages (to provide automatic shutdown in the event of power outages > 10 minutes) I admit, however, that I haven't bothered to upgrade my primary media server to v5 ... it's happily running v4.7 and has been rock solid for a long time [Current Uptime is > 150 days, and that was only because of a power failure]. I'll wait for v5 Final before doing that upgrade ... and may not even bother then unless/until I need to replace a drive (when I'll likely upgrade just so I can use > 2TB drives). Link to comment
dalben Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 I do not know how you all have waited for 5.0 for over 3 years! It has been a month and I am already checking back every couple of hours to see if anything has changed... I'm now looking at other solutions. I really want a single box to handle storage, media downloading, web server, and anything else that takes my fancy. Bu I don't hae the room or the understanding wife to have multiple boxes. I'm currently tossing between FreeNAS, going bareback on Ubuntu or investing in HW and building an esxi box where unraid only handles WORM type storage for me. I'm pretty sure I wouldn't have considered a different platform if I felt unraid was a professional product that I could rely on beng around and relevant in 2 to 3 years time. Link to comment
mejutty Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 I am currently running on RC10 and it is stable for how I am using it. I am running sick, sab, APC, Plex with 25Tb of protected storage and a cache drive. I am in no hurry at this point I moving to the latest RC as this is stable and unless another RC comes out that has something I need/want I'll wait till final. I also am about to move my server into ESXi so I can run other systems/labs on the hardware as well. Combined with the plexapp on my TV's it is currently as Wife friendly as it has ever been and I virtually never get asked how to watch something or where is something anymore. It just works. I am not saying I have not had issues, I currently have this line in my go file "echo 65536 > /proc/sys/vm/min_free_kbytes" as I was getting out of memory errors while trying to pre-clear additional drives with the array running but this is now all fine. Link to comment
mr-hexen Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 I agree the most recent RC's are stable enough for 99% of users, but the driving force behind calling it "final" is for add-on developers. how many times has an add-on been broken (or break unraid) after a new Beta/RC? each time their told wait for final before making add-ons. it just irks me that features that no one really cheered for (btrfs/cache pool) are being added rather than features that MANY have asked/demanded for quite sometime. to name a few: 1. email/status notification BUILT IN. 2. Plugin Manager. 3. Second Parity. 4. preclear BUILT IN. 5. Clean Powerdown BUILT IN. 6. Parity check schedule, BUILT IN. IMO, the lack of focus on these and adding BTRFS shows that this is more a hobby for Tom then a business. He's adding something no one really wanted because it was "cool" for him to do.. Link to comment
PeterB Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 I agree the most recent RC's are stable enough for 99% of users Agreed! ...but the driving force behind calling it "final" is for add-on developers. I'm not convinced about this. If nothing else, the add-on developers would welcome the full implementation of the plugin manager with proper documentation. I am sure that we will all end up having to revisit the plugins we've developed when the manager/documentation is released. The sooner it happens, the less pre-existing plugins will need attention. how many times has an add-on been broken (or break unraid) after a new Beta/RC? each time their told wait for final before making add-ons. As far as I'm aware, most occurrences of broken plugins arise because of conflicting libraries being loaded or because the existing plugin interface isn't 'rich' enough to support the functionality the developers are wishing to add. Both of these could be addressed by a fully implemented plugin manager. it just irks me that features that no one really cheered for (btrfs/cache pool) are being added rather than features that MANY have asked/demanded for quite sometime. to name a few: 1. email/status notification BUILT IN. 2. Plugin Manager. 3. Second Parity. 4. preclear BUILT IN. 5. Clean Powerdown BUILT IN. 6. Parity check schedule, BUILT IN. On the other hand, it could be argued: "Why spend time re-inventing facilities which are already adequately provided by existing addons?" However, I do concur with your items 2 & 3. IMO, the lack of focus on these and adding BTRFS shows that this is more a hobby for Tom then a business. He's adding something no one really wanted because it was "cool" for him to do.. If it wasn't for Tom's 'hobby' we wouldn't have the benefit of unRAID at all. Link to comment
garycase Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 If it wasn't for Tom's 'hobby' we wouldn't have the benefit of unRAID at all. +1 As for the feature list ... I would definitely like to see #5 (CleanPowerDown) and #1 (e-mail notifications) built-in. Pre-clear would be nice, but is simple enough to do manually. Obvioiusly a 2nd parity would be nice, but this is much more difficult (mathematically it's not just another parity disk). Link to comment
PeterB Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 One argument for leaving a lot of the ancillary functionality to addons is that not everyone wants every function. unRAID, being a totally memory-resident system will suffer from an increased memory footprint for each function which is built in. Link to comment
dikkiedirk Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 I have a little issue with the latest RCs. I reported about this earlier after I upgraded to RC10 and hoped it would have been solved by upgrading to RC12a. Unfortunately it is still there as I found out yesterday. 20 minutes after starting a parity check messages (rcu_sched self-detected stall on CPU) appear in the syslog and I don't know where they come. Please check the enclosed syslog, at 17:04 om May 9. I run baremetal at the moment. Either with full 16 GB of RAM or 4GB parameter. syslog-2013-05-10.zip Link to comment
Seven Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 +1 RC12a is rock-solid for everything I use it for. I am, however, a "plain vanilla" user -- just the base install plus UnMenu with the CleanPowerDown and APC UPS packages (to provide automatic shutdown in the event of power outages > 10 minutes) Another "plain vanilla" user here. Do you have anything running to make your 5x server go to sleep X amount of inactivity? Link to comment
garycase Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 +1 RC12a is rock-solid for everything I use it for. I am, however, a "plain vanilla" user -- just the base install plus UnMenu with the CleanPowerDown and APC UPS packages (to provide automatic shutdown in the event of power outages > 10 minutes) Another "plain vanilla" user here. Do you have anything running to make your 5x server go to sleep X amount of inactivity? No, it's always on. However, it only draws ~ 20W with all drives spun down Link to comment
Recommended Posts