I voted "other" because I don't actually care.  I mean I care in so much as I want a choice that is simple, stable, robust, well supported and documented, with low resources, etc etc etc.  But I am completely OS agnostic as I consider myself a Linux duffer at best.  I don't know a lot, but what I don't I can google the crap out of it and am not scared to try things out ;-)

Think this looks great! Really hope this project takes off, and gets Toms blessing :-D

 

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 4

This topic is very interesting eventhough i didnt care about Virtualisation in combination with Unraid till now because i thought it would be too complicated.

 

Just a quick question for my better understanding with what you want to do know it would be possible for me to:

-Have a base OS like Arch or CentOS which can run all Linux Software i want without the need of plugins because it is a fullfledged Linux OS

 

Yes, it is easy if its already available as a package for that distro...or it can be build from source.

-unRaid will work just as a Software in Arch or is it also virtualized (like in your signature)

right, this is about shipping unRAID as a package in a common distro...unRAID will run on bare metal.

-I could also run my Mediaportal TV Server under Windows 7 as guest on my server passing throught my 2 TV Cards?

Yes, but here you still need the appropriate hardware support for passthrough (CPU, mobo-chioset and BIOS)...this does not change.

Btw. what about S3 Sleep, would that work just as good as with my current "normal" Setup or is this approach meant to be a 24/7 running server only?

I'll work if your hardware supports S3...VMs will be suspended by the host automatically.

I use KVM with RHEL6.4 on my laptop for work...if I close the lid, all suspends...when I re-open the lid, all VMs come up (locked, of course..security is part of that  )

So If you plan to use virtualization, you have some more options now.

As always, you will need the required hardware and resources...especially more RAM....or even a lot more RAM 

In case of employing vt-d/IOMMU these things have not changed (besides you won't need it for unRAID, as this is now native on your VM-host)

 

A Sempron supports AMD-V or vt-x in intel-lingo..so virtualizing Windoze on the unRAID host is an option with use of KVM or XEN...however vt-d/IOMMU is not an option with that CPU, I am afraid.

In case we can make it for Proxmox.VE, there is the option of lightweight containers (CT or OpenVZ) for running linux based VMs, too....you will not even need vt-x for that, but it's lightweight in terms

of "this needs a lot less RAM than in a real VM" what is the real feature in this case.

 

So that brings up a question I haven't been able to figure out yet.  Is there an easy way to find out what support our motherboard has short of trying to do full VM setup?  At one point I tried a live disc of an OS I now can't remember with Xen just to see what it looked like, how far I could go, etc.  But I quickly ran into problems I didn't have the time, at the time, to dig into to determine if it was a virtualization support problem, or what. 

 

I know my CPU (in sig) has AMD-V, but I can't tell what my motherboard supports as far as IOMMU and things like passing through my USB stick.  From what I read above that last bit won't matter with UnRaid as host, but that was something I was curious about before I threw myself into the Xen deep end with unraid as a VM.

 

So that brings up a question I haven't been able to figure out yet.  Is there an easy way to find out what support our motherboard has short of trying to do full VM setup?  At one point I tried a live disc of an OS I now can't remember with Xen just to see what it looked like, how far I could go, etc.  But I quickly ran into problems I didn't have the time, at the time, to dig into to determine if it was a virtualization support problem, or what. 

 

I know my CPU (in sig) has AMD-V, but I can't tell what my motherboard supports as far as IOMMU and things like passing through my USB stick.  From what I read above that last bit won't matter with UnRaid as host, but that was something I was curious about before I threw myself into the Xen deep end with unraid as a VM.

 

Your mobo-chipset does *not* support IOMMU/vt-d...so passthrough of controllers is not an option.

However running KVM or XEN to virtualize Windows is supported.

The Feature inside your BIOS "CPU-Config", named "Secure Virtual Machine" needs to be ticked/enabled, which is for enabling AMD-V.

 

BTW: Your setup *does* support ECC RAM 

Looks interesting and will more then likely test it when you release it be warned though I'm not Linux minded at all, but always willing to learn what i can.

 

I was looking at running unRAID in a VM and plugins / software in another but this has got me thinking i no longer need to do this.

 

Would i be correct in my understanding that you would install this distro with unRAID baked in to a small drive maybe an ssd or 2.5" drive and you would have all the goodness of unRAID and have a full dristo to play with and install things like serviio, transmission, ownclould and they can access all your unRAID drives?

 

Couple of questions:

• With using arch as a base can you run this headless, I have no monitor or keyboard connected to server?
  
• From what Ive read arch is pretty cutting edge, wouldn't something like debian or another less cutting edge distro be a better alternative, less chance of something messing your system up?
  
• Will the pre-clear script still work and would Joe L support it in the distro based unRAID?
  
• If i was to want to put the plugins / software in a VM using Xen I take it my hardware would need to support AMD-V Technology with IOMMU, still learning here.
  

 

Hope this makes sense.

 

Hi Ford any answers on what i asked back here?

Yes I've seen the bios option for Secure VM on both my boards, that was the only thing giving me hope I have no real desire to run a windows VM, I've already got a windows PC for that.

 

So you're telling me using Xen to run an UnRaid VM is not an option.  Correct?

 

But what about this project coupled with a linux VM to run Plex Media Server?  Can I give it direct access to an SSD (I can do that right vice passing it through?) and then it could see the array via bridged network right?  I would still have trouble passing through my Intel Nic though wouldn't I? 

 

Or would I just end up running PMS on the main host since it is now a full Linux install? and frankly less likely to be crashed by PMS vice the setup we have now?

 

Oh boy, expensive memory, just what I've always wanted ;-)

 

Well anyway what I got most from your reply is that I'm now glad I didn't buy a new mb/cpu/memory yet with the extra money that popped up because it probably wouldn't have the support I needed either.

 

I know Ironic (or was it grumpy) has posted a link to a IOMMU supported hardware page but that list of motherboards seems awfully anemic.  I can't believe those are the only boards that we can use  

Hi Ford any answers on what i asked back here?

 

..working my way up 

 

Would i be correct in my understanding that you would install this distro with unRAID baked in to a small drive maybe an ssd or 2.5" drive and you would have all the goodness of unRAID and have a full dristo to play with and install things like serviio, transmission, ownclould and they can access all your unRAID drives?

yes to the part with the full distro.

However on how you deploy it, there are still options...given the fact that SSDs come cheap, this is an easy way, but not compatible with the licensing scheme, which is tied to a GUID of your USB-Stcik.

One might as well combine it and use the stick merely as a dongle or keep the architecture as is and make the distro run-able in RAM...given the fact that RAM is not a limiting factor for most.

 

Couple of questions:

• With using arch as a base can you run this headless, I have no monitor or keyboard connected to server?

I do not know ARCH that deep, but I see no reason why a server/headless system would not be possible

 

• From what Ive read arch is pretty cutting edge, wouldn't something like debian or another less cutting edge distro be a better alternative, less chance of something messing your system up?

Yes, that is correct...a reason why I voted for another distro myself 

• Will the pre-clear script still work and would Joe L support it in the distro based unRAID?

it will certainly still work...it does not depend on unRAID at all...just on perl and smartmontools.

I am still using it for all my disks, although I am not employing a single unRAID Box ATM.

As to the ongoing support from Joe L. as the author and maintainer...this is up to him of course.

• If i was to want to put the plugins / software in a VM using Xen I take it my hardware would need to support AMD-V Technology with IOMMU, still learning here.

...for a VM with XEN or KVM your hardware will need to support AMD-V/vt-x...IOMMU/vt-d is *not* required unless you want to passthrough hardware to a VM.

One question that springs to mind is migrating an existing unRAID setup. I would hate to have to use 2 computers to migrate all my data over, start again and then put all the data back. If that is the case, so be it, but ew!

One question that springs to mind is migrating an existing unRAID setup. I would hate to have to use 2 computers to migrate all my data over, start again and then put all the data back. If that is the case, so be it, but ew!

 

The unraid MD module (the raid part of unraid) would simply mount your data drives as normal. No worries. So long as your super.DAT etc remain its easy peasy.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

 

 

So you're telling me using Xen to run an UnRaid VM is not an option.  Correct?

It is not a good option, as you cannot passthrough the controller directly, which would IMHO the only way of doing it right...but this is just my viewpoint.

 

But what about this project coupled with a linux VM to run Plex Media Server?  Can I give it direct access to an SSD (I can do that right vice passing it through?) and then it could see the array via bridged network right?  I would still have trouble passing through my Intel Nic though wouldn't I? 

No, the OS inside the VM will only see virtual hardware.

This includes disks and NICs.

However some of the real hardware parts support virtualisation so the virtual hardware is kind of accelerated.

In order for Plex inside the VM to see the native unRAID arry...it would not...it'll see the unRAID storage/NAS via SMB or NFS over the NIC, just like any other computer on your network, like your HTPC.

If you install the right drivers in the VM, you will get full CPU bandwidth (yes, even if the virtual NIC is a 1GB-Model it can xfer up to +10GBit speed), so nothing to be worried about performance.

 

Or would I just end up running PMS on the main host since it is now a full Linux install? and frankly less likely to be crashed by PMS vice the setup we have now?

This is an option too and a purely architectural decision...as it has been.

New is, that the decision is now yours 

A VM requires more RAM and resources but delivers security and easier operations.

If I were in someone elses shoes in possession of a system with the required resources, I'd always opt for a VM....even in a distro things get broken and rollback is mostly a pita.

With a VM, I'd have a snapshot of the system disk on my host and would roll-back in no-time.

If you're into virtualisation, the first rule is to keep the host "tidy".

The unRAID module is provisioning of resources, so this is part of the infrastructure -> host...Plex is a goodie, something to play with -> VM.

 

Oh boy, expensive memory, just what I've always wanted ;-)

 

Well anyway what I got most from your reply is that I'm now glad I didn't buy a new mb/cpu/memory yet with the extra money that popped up because it probably wouldn't have the support I needed either.

 

I know Ironic (or was it grumpy) has posted a link to a IOMMU supported hardware page but that list of motherboards seems awfully anemic.  I can't believe those are the only boards that we can use

 

...for AMD with ECC support, these are still cheap.

There are intel based desktops that are good to go at a reasonable price but you'll not getting ECC support with them.

A Sempron supports AMD-V or vt-x in intel-lingo..so virtualizing Windoze on the unRAID host is an option with use of KVM or XEN...however vt-d/IOMMU is not an option with that CPU, I am afraid.

In case we can make it for Proxmox.VE, there is the option of lightweight containers (CT or OpenVZ) for running linux based VMs, too....you will not even need vt-x for that, but it's lightweight in terms

of "this needs a lot less RAM than in a real VM" what is the real feature in this case.

OK, that is what I figured but I just wanted to make sure I was thinking correctly.

So you're telling me using Xen to run an UnRaid VM is not an option.  Correct?

It is not a good option, as you cannot passthrough the controller directly, which would IMHO the only way of doing it right...but this is just my viewpoint.

Got it

 

But what about this project coupled with a linux VM to run Plex Media Server?  Can I give it direct access to an SSD (I can do that right vice passing it through?) and then it could see the array via bridged network right?  I would still have trouble passing through my Intel Nic though wouldn't I? 

No, the OS inside the VM will only see virtual hardware.

This includes disks and NICs.

However some of the real hardware parts support virtualisation so the virtual hardware is kind of accelerated.

In order for Plex inside the VM to see the native unRAID arry...it would not...it'll see the unRAID storage/NAS via SMB or NFS over the NIC, just like any other computer on your network, like your HTPC.

If you install the right drivers in the VM, you will get full CPU bandwidth (yes, even if the virtual NIC is a 1GB-Model it can xfer up to +10GBit speed), so nothing to be worried about performance.

 

Right. PMS in a Linux VM talking to UnRaid over the very fast virtual NIC was what I understood, so hearing it again confirms what I thought. 

 

Just to be sure I understand the implications of what you are saying as it relates to running PMS in a VM ... PMS itself only needs access to a drive to store its library data.  And you're telling me I can't give it access because of my specific hardware not allowing controller pass through.  Got it?

 

But, what if I have an appdrive mounted in UnRaid-host and exported to the network? PMS could see it via the virtual NIC, *IF* I could actually configure PMS to save its database to a network resource (as opposed to /mnt/appdrive/plex).  I'm not sure you can do that with an SMB share (or can you?).  That makes me wonder if the solution is to use NFS?  I'm NSF ignorant for the most part but the little I've read makes me think a feature of NSF is exactly that; present a resource over the network as if it you had access to it locally. 

 

Is my understanding correct?

 

I need to find out, probably from the Plex folks, if the config screen can be pointed to a database location that is a network resource (//tower/...) as opposed to what it does right now which is point it at /mnt/...

 

Because if there is some way to run Plex in a VM without full controller passthrough that would be huge for what I bet is a lot of people not in possession of IOMMU motherboards.

 

Or would I just end up running PMS on the main host since it is now a full Linux install? and frankly less likely to be crashed by PMS vice the setup we have now?

This is an option too and a purely architectural decision...as it has been.

New is, that the decision is now yours 

A VM requires more RAM and resources but delivers security and easier operations.

If I were in someone elses shoes in possession of a system with the required resources, I'd always opt for a VM....even in a distro things get broken and rollback is mostly a pita.

With a VM, I'd have a snapshot of the system disk on my host and would roll-back in no-time.

If you're into virtualisation, the first rule is to keep the host "tidy".

The unRAID module is provisioning of resources, so this is part of the infrastructure -> host...Plex is a goodie, something to play with -> VM.

 

I agree completely. Ideally I would have UnRaid-host be "tidy" and run all else in VM's. 

 

Oh boy, expensive memory, just what I've always wanted ;-)

 

Well anyway what I got most from your reply is that I'm now glad I didn't buy a new mb/cpu/memory yet with the extra money that popped up because it probably wouldn't have the support I needed either.

 

I know Ironic (or was it grumpy) has posted a link to a IOMMU supported hardware page but that list of motherboards seems awfully anemic.  I can't believe those are the only boards that we can use

 

...for AMD with ECC support, these are still cheap.

There are intel based desktops that are good to go at a reasonable price but you'll not getting ECC support with them.

 

But in the end still useless if I can't run decent VM's, ECC or otherwise.

To echo some of the comments above, I'm also excited about this possibility, but don't know enough to make an intelligent choice in the poll.  From what I've read (here in this thread mainly) Arch might be too 'agressive' or 'advanced' to be a good first option.  simple/easy/foolproof should be the driving factors for the first public release/test of this product/version.

 

What I think I've read, and I hope I'm right, is that I could install this to get my full unRAID storage with the protection it provides, but I might also be able to use the same box to install windows to run my HTPC.  This would be outstanding!

 

I recently moved, and did not bring the HTPC with me here, so this sounds like a good way to get that functionality back, without bring that box, or buying another one.

 

Even if I misunderstand, the other benefits of this sound great, and I look forward to a first release for us to try.

 

Thanks for everything so far!

To echo some of the comments above, I'm also excited about this possibility, but don't know enough to make an intelligent choice in the poll.  From what I've read (here in this thread mainly) Arch might be too 'agressive' or 'advanced' to be a good first option.  simple/easy/foolproof should be the driving factors for the first public release/test of this product/version.

 

What I think I've read, and I hope I'm right, is that I could install this to get my full unRAID storage with the protection it provides, but I might also be able to use the same box to install windows to run my HTPC.  This would be outstanding!

 

I recently moved, and did not bring the HTPC with me here, so this sounds like a good way to get that functionality back, without bring that box, or buying another one.

 

Even if I misunderstand, the other benefits of this sound great, and I look forward to a first release for us to try.

 

Thanks for everything so far!

 

Congrats, you are top banana today. This is exactly what I'm working towards... It's what I do now, but just am working on making it idiot-proof which it currently most certainly is not!!

Right. PMS in a Linux VM talking to UnRaid over the very fast virtual NIC was what I understood, so hearing it again confirms what I thought. 

 

Just to be sure I understand the implications of what you are saying as it relates to running PMS in a VM ... PMS itself only needs access to a drive to store its library data.  And you're telling me I can't give it access because of my specific hardware not allowing controller pass through.  Got it?

 

But, what if I have an appdrive mounted in UnRaid-host and exported to the network? PMS could see it via the virtual NIC, *IF* I could actually configure PMS to save its database to a network resource (as opposed to /mnt/appdrive/plex).  I'm not sure you can do that with an SMB share (or can you?).  That makes me wonder if the solution is to use NFS?  I'm NSF ignorant for the most part but the little I've read makes me think a feature of NSF is exactly that; present a resource over the network as if it you had access to it locally. 

 

Is my understanding correct?

 

I need to find out, probably from the Plex folks, if the config screen can be pointed to a database location that is a network resource (//tower/...) as opposed to what it does right now which is point it at /mnt/...

 

Because if there is some way to run Plex in a VM without full controller passthrough that would be huge for what I bet is a lot of people not in possession of IOMMU motherboards.

 

Well, IF you were to choose Linux as the Plex OS in your VM...you can add any SMB share as a mount-point when the VM boots. Plex application/server won't see the difference between these being local or networked.

 

Edit: with the appdrive mounted/inserted in the host, it will have the same availability as the local disks in VM...no risk involved to break anything.

Edit2: I don't know Plex or the concept of an appdrive...if the intention is to share that data with more than one box or make it portable, there might be scenarios where Plex needs to have some kind of support for that or be aware of that...for example locking access for concurrent access during writing of data.

I voted "other" because I don't actually care.  I mean I care in so much as I want a choice that is simple, stable, robust, well supported and documented, with low resources, etc etc etc.  But I am completely OS agnostic as I consider myself a Linux duffer at best.  I don't know a lot, but what I don't I can google the crap out of it and am not scared to try things out ;-)

Following this thread with great interest, and this post pretty much captures most of my thoughts on this. I would probably still want to run headless so web management would be nice.

 

I know from other virtualization discussion that my current CPU does not support vt-d but I would be willing to change it if necessary, and also would be willing to pay additional licensing fees or whatever.

What I would be looking for in something like this is the ability to use  my 6 onboard sata ports for unraid and data stores, that is some of them for unraid and the rest for vm data stores. Currently I can't do this in my xenserver environment as the ports are all running off the same motherboard controller.

I'd also like to run XBMC with output to my TV, but this is dependant on finding a video/sound card that runs on a x4 pci express slot and is meaty enough for 1080p and 1080i.

Well, IF you were to choose Linux as the Plex OS in your VM...you can add any SMB share as a mount-point when the VM boots. Plex application/server won't see the difference between these being local or networked.

 

Edit: with the appdrive mounted/inserted in the host, it will have the same availability as the local disks in VM...no risk involved to break anything.

Edit2: I don't know Plex or the concept of an appdrive...if the intention is to share that data with more than one box or make it portable, there might be scenarios where Plex needs to have some kind of support for that or be aware of that...for example locking access for concurrent access during writing of data.

 

You don't even need a VM.

 

You boot OpenElec over the network using PXE and could (not needed) use NFS, iscsi, AoE, virtFS, etc

 

Let's assume its straight unRAID...

 

You boot your openELEC via PXE. It loads Openelec over IP (in seconds) all the configuration is stored (per openelec box) on the unRAID server. You can either use the internal XBMC database or put all your XBMCs on a central one using the mysql plugin. That way if you watch 15 minutes of a movie and switch TVs when you go to another TV to watch it... it starts where it was.

 

You would access your movie or TV folders on your unRAID via NFS or Samba.  Everything works like it normally does.

 

You do not need a Hard Drive or VM for Openelec (Or Linux and Windows) if you do it this way. Its extremely fast and even sleep works. You turn on the openelec box, it boots into the server via PXE, loads the OS and XBMC and away you go. It happens almost as fast as if you had a hard drive in it.

 

I have had as many as 5 OpenElec and other Linux XBMCs going at once and my unRAID server was still less than 5%. Its IP traffic after all and not writing anything hardly to the server.

 

There are guides on how to do this for most Linux Distros and Openelec (which is its own Linux Distro).

I'd also like to run XBMC with output to my TV, but this is dependant on finding a video/sound card that runs on a x4 pci express slot and is meaty enough for 1080p and 1080i.

 

 

If I could marry my unRAID server and XBMC into one machine, I would do it in a heart beat.

I've been wanting to do this for years.

 

 

I'd also like to run XBMC with output to my TV, but this is dependant on finding a video/sound card that runs on a x4 pci express slot and is meaty enough for 1080p and 1080i.

 

I employed this http://www.hisdigital.com/un/product2-675.shtml when I converted my old X8SIL-F/L3426 to become my new workstation. 

Also have a GT-520 in PCIe-x1 lying around for a project that will turn my spare X7SPA-HF into an extra HTPC.

I'd also like to run XBMC with output to my TV, but this is dependant on finding a video/sound card that runs on a x4 pci express slot and is meaty enough for 1080p and 1080i.

 

 

If I could marry my unRAID server and XBMC into one machine, I would do it in a heart beat.

I've been wanting to do this for years.

 

Yup. Me too. That's why I went down the Xen route originally... I take it though that you mean not virtualised... If you don't that's already possible with the stuff I blog about.

I'd also like to run XBMC with output to my TV, but this is dependant on finding a video/sound card that runs on a x4 pci express slot and is meaty enough for 1080p and 1080i.

 

If I could marry my unRAID server and XBMC into one machine, I would do it in a heart beat.

I've been wanting to do this for years.

 

Yup. Me too. That's why I went down the Xen route originally... I take it though that you mean not virtualised... If you don't that's already possible with the stuff I blog about.

 

I would prefer it virtualized. I understand the benefits and I prefer to separate operating systems by some level.

So much so that at one time I had over 20 machines around my apartment.

 

These days it's all about virtualizing.  If I could have a limetech AVS server with unRAID, XBMC and Windows all virtualized, that would make me very happy...(with an occasional boot up of slackware for developing unRAID plugins.)

Well, IF you were to choose Linux as the Plex OS in your VM...you can add any SMB share as a mount-point when the VM boots. Plex application/server won't see the difference between these being local or networked.

 

Edit: with the appdrive mounted/inserted in the host, it will have the same availability as the local disks in VM...no risk involved to break anything.

Edit2: I don't know Plex or the concept of an appdrive...if the intention is to share that data with more than one box or make it portable, there might be scenarios where Plex needs to have some kind of support for that or be aware of that...for example locking access for concurrent access during writing of data.

 

You don't even need a VM.

 

You boot OpenElec over the network using PXE and could (not needed) use NFS, iscsi, AoE, virtFS, etc

 

Let's assume its straight unRAID...

 

You boot your openELEC via PXE. It loads Openelec over IP (in seconds) all the configuration is stored (per openelec box) on the unRAID server. You can either use the internal XBMC database or put all your XBMCs on a central one using the mysql plugin. That way if you watch 15 minutes of a movie and switch TVs when you go to another TV to watch it... it starts where it was.

 

You would access your movie or TV folders on your unRAID via NFS or Samba.  Everything works like it normally does.

 

You do not need a Hard Drive or VM for Openelec (Or Linux and Windows) if you do it this way. Its extremely fast and even sleep works. You turn on the openelec box, it boots into the server via PXE, loads the OS and XBMC and away you go. It happens almost as fast as if you had a hard drive in it.

 

I have had as many as 5 OpenElec and other Linux XBMCs going at once and my unRAID server was still less than 5%. Its IP traffic after all and not writing anything hardly to the server.

 

There are guides on how to do this for most Linux Distros and Openelec (which is its own Linux Distro).

 

I would like to know more about this...offline.  I never had much luck PXE booting OpenELEC in a VM.  I'm sure it is a matter of drivers and such but that was beyond my knowledge.

 

Grumpy...look for an email. 

 

John

 

EDIT:  Actually, I re-read your post and think I misunderstood.  You have OpenELEC boxes at each TV?

I would like to know more about this...offline.  I never had much luck PXE booting OpenELEC in a VM.  I'm sure it is a matter of drivers and such but that was beyond my knowledge.

 

Grumpy...look for an email. 

 

John

 

EDIT:  Actually, I re-read your post and think I misunderstood.  You have OpenELEC boxes at each TV?

 

I don't use openELEC but I have tested it. Yes if booting via PXE it requires a PC or Pi or any number of the Pi like devices at the TVs. Considering these are cheap these days and can do 1080p with Video Hardware Acceleration. Beats installing a video card, having a VM, etc.

 

If you wanted, you could passthrough a Video Card to a VM and use OpenElec (or any OS with XBMC) and do it that way too.

 

I thought my PXE was the best till I saw yours. For OpenElec it's similar to other OSes or how you are doing unRAID. Point tftp to the openELEC Kernel and pointing it to the root (instead of a bzroot it's a folder in your tftp folder). It saves all the XBMC files in a folder based on the MAC address for each box.

 

I just saw your thread on OpenElec. I can do it and shoot you an email on how I did it. BTW - Where is your PXE Server? A VM? On unRAID? On a different server?