December 13, 201312 yr This may be a silly question, but here goes anyways... By having unraid baked in to the distro does this mean that i don't have to pass through controllers to unraid like i do at the moment in xenserver with unraid as a VM ? Bingo. One of the many benefits. Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk So, with this method, unraid runs in the linux OS and then on top of that, we can run our VMs in Xen, right? So, for those using virtual box on unRAID, this is way way better. Sounds awesome!
December 13, 201312 yr Author This may be a silly question, but here goes anyways... By having unraid baked in to the distro does this mean that i don't have to pass through controllers to unraid like i do at the moment in xenserver with unraid as a VM ? Bingo. One of the many benefits. Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk So, with this method, unraid runs in the linux OS and then on top of that, we can run our VMs in Xen, right? So, for those using virtual box on unRAID, this is way way better. Sounds awesome! What's the obsession with virtual box? In comparison to a type 1 hypervisor, which is xen or KVM, its not exactly a waste of time but like driving a vw polo when you have a Porsche. Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
December 13, 201312 yr What's the obsession with virtual box? In comparison to a type 1 hypervisor, which is xen or KVM, its not exactly a waste of time but like driving a vw polo when you have a Porsche. Maybe you misread what he wrote. He was stating that Xen (being a type 1 Hypervisor) would be much better to use than Virtual Box (being a type 2 Hypervisor). EDIT: and that those currently using Virtual Box would be much better served using the product you and grumpybutfun are working on.
December 13, 201312 yr What's the obsession with virtual box? In comparison to a type 1 hypervisor, which is xen or KVM, its not exactly a waste of time but like driving a vw polo when you have a Porsche. I am old so I use / drive a "walker". All of which makes me grumpy. But at least I am still fun.
December 13, 201312 yr Author What's the obsession with virtual box? In comparison to a type 1 hypervisor, which is xen or KVM, its not exactly a waste of time but like driving a vw polo when you have a Porsche. I am old so I use / drive a "walker". All of which makes me grumpy. But at least I am still fun. Are you? That fact had escaped me! Just kidding I did misread so apologies! Will have a version of this new product, which for now I will dub "MegaRAID" haha! Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
December 13, 201312 yr Will have a version of this new product, which for now I will dub "MegaRAID" haha! Will = We will Is there a mouse in your pocket? When / how did I get roped into this? You are the one taking a 64 Bit version of unRAID and expanding on it and packaging it up into a nice Distro for everyone. It has been a week and I still haven't finished the unRAID KVM documentation yet (almost done though). I'd get fired in no time if you were depending on me.
December 14, 201312 yr Author Nearly finished for Xmas then work on this will begin properly. Aiming to have something usable, even if rough around the edges, by new year. Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
December 14, 201312 yr Author Guys! Guys!!! Huge news, check my new thread. (I made a new one so as I could grab the first post and stuff). http://lime-technology.com/forum/index.php?topic=30777.0
December 19, 201312 yr Would using the 64bit version incur a performance increase? I'm guessing that older systems, only with 4-8GB of ram and older processor (still 64bit) would probably run better with 32bit anyway, right? Since it takes more processing power and memory to run 64bit rigs? I'm just trying to think ahead, since I may be upgrading soon and would want to get the appropriate hardware. I'm running I believe just 4GB of ram on an old duo-core processor and thinking about upgrading the system.
December 19, 201312 yr Would using the 64bit version incur a performance increase? I doubt it will be measurable for unRAID file serving alone. What it could help with is buffer cache. We might be able to cache more directory entries in ram, thus causing less spin ups. There would be less memory paging for higher ram. We could blow out our configurations to very large amounts of ram. utilizing a few kernel tunings, you could make use of the buffer cache to store the data temporarily thus providing 'burstable' high speed writes. I say burstable because as the buffer cache starts filling and gets written out, the writes start slowing down over time. For smaller files you could burst at over 60-80mb/s as the larger file starts to fill, it slows down to about 30-35Mb/s Still, if you are copying over a huge directory of pics, or editing mp3tags (as I do) it helps a great deal.
January 24, 201412 yr It seems Crash Plan uses half a gigabyte of memory for each terabyte under backup, probably due to data deduplication (my guess at least). It seems quite likely that I'll run into a 4GB limit problem on the 32bit java jvm before I have all my data under backup. It takes a while to upload and I just started, so I don't know if it'll be a problem, but I'm in for 64bit as it seems to be required sooner for my backup. Here they claim 1GB ram pr 1TB backup, for me it didn't crash quite that quickly. http://crashplan.probackup.nl/remote-backup/support/q/keeps-stopping-and-starting.en.html Alex
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.