[POLL] Should Lime Technology make unRAID CentOS 64-Bit Edition?



Recommended Posts

LOL, concluding that 61k users on a forum means that 61k  people bought licenses is a false conclusion.

Your calculator is broken. I didn't use 61,000 when I came up with my guesstimate.

 

Also, concluding the majority are willing to pay for an update get a full distribution is another false conclusion. Is there a market, sure some people would use it. Is it enough of a market to put time and resources towards? I'm not sure, but 74 yes votes on a survey certainly doesn't prove there is a $3.5 million market.

 

So I can put you down for a maybe on creating a "fork" of unRAID or purchasing it?

 

Link to comment
  • Replies 112
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

nice thread, will have to take some time to digest it properly, quick thing ive been mulling over, does the unraid md patch stop you using mdadm to manage a seperate array? or does it just add features?

 

(silly question but surely i cant be the only one wondering and didn't see it mentioned in any of the other threads)

Link to comment

1. Even if Tom gave me permission to post a guide, I would not be able to properly support it.

 

2. I asked Tom for a separate section on the forum where we could have various subforums (Installation, Configuration, Etc.) for us to use. Tom is currently reviewing his business plan and perhaps this is something he is considering.

 

3. It's been my experience in my other guides that most users do not stick around, "pay it forward", contribute back, help me or their fellow man out.

 

4. I'm not a Lime Technology employee, this isn't my full time job and I contribute as much as I can when I have free time. Due to 2 and 3 above... This would consume A LOT of my time and resources and I do not believe just one person could do it.

That's disappointing, but I can understand your point of view.

 

I'm currently trying to use the wiki guide on installing unraid on full slackware as a base for attempting to do the same thing on a CentOS 6.5 vm. Am just downloading the kernel source now.

 

If you do have any pointers/gotchas that you could tell me about in PM please do :)

I think I might have to give up on my attempt to get it working in CentOS. I can't get the kernel to run. I must be missing something, but I have no idea what.

 

I'm following the wiki guide to install unraid on a full slackware install, but using CentOS instead of slack.

 

I've got the kernel sources for the same kernel version as in unraid 5.0.4, copied the unraid config and md driver files. I then run make menuconfig - and this is where I must be going wrong, as I have no idea what should/shouldn't be enabled.

 

I've followed the recommendations in the slackware guide as best I can and enabled all that it says. But when I finish, then build and install the kernel. When I try to reboot into the new kernel I get a kernel panic.

 

Have tried redoing the config and adding more drivers to the kernel (mostly just ones that sound like they might be needed) but always get the same result.

 

I'm trying all of this in a Virtualbox VM

Link to comment

SnapRAID is precisely what I have been looking at recently.....but I still have preference for unRAID, and would prefer to stick with it but only if it moves forward at some point.

 

Either way I am glad this topic is still being promoted / discussed here after the other thread was locked

So do I. I checked back snapraid and looked promising, especially the multi parity drives. What put new off however was the lack of webGui

 

Sent from my GT-I9305 using Tapatalk

 

 

Link to comment

I too have outgrown unRAID and have moved to a Ubuntu server with snapRAID. Don't be put off by the lack of GUI. There is very little need for it.  I use AUFS for pooling. SnapRaid sends me nightly emails following a sync.

 

Webmin fills in the GUI needs of a server or install a desktop and use VNC.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

 

Link to comment

Keep looking at Ubuntu server and snap raid myself, but love my unraid box. Its setup and just works. So want to see this ubraid distro come into the light of day.

 

How does the performance on snap raid compare to unraid, copying to and from the server.

 

Do like the idea of having 2 parity drives to cover my 13 drives instead of 1, this always seemed like asking for trouble.

 

Only thing I wasn't sure of was the fact that when I copy a file to a snap raid setup it isn't protected until a sync is done.

 

As i run a headless server web admin is important to me, don't see the point in installing a desktop and then vnc into a server.

 

Grumpy has already shown a lot of tools that can used to monitor the server.

 

Will have to set up a virtualbox install and have a play with the various tools.

 

Lots to learn as never really played with a linux server.

 

Do want to play with mysql and ownclould though.

 

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk

 

 

Link to comment

Experience is great.  I install most things in CLI but you could do it through webmin.  I have PLEX, Transmission, Subsonic, BT Torrentsync, Handbrake, snapRAID etc installed.  So you could jump in with a setup like mine and add unRAID after the dust has settled as to what the final Extreme product becomes.

 

Kryspy

Link to comment

nice thread, will have to take some time to digest it properly, quick thing ive been mulling over, does the unraid md patch stop you using mdadm to manage a seperate array? or does it just add features?

 

(silly question but surely i cant be the only one wondering and didn't see it mentioned in any of the other threads)

 

IMHO that is not a silly question at all.

 

md, since the introduction of dm (and with that comes the usage of LVM2), is pretty "dead", as the combo of dm/lvm is much more flexible....and the two (md/dm) can co-exist in the kernel.

I'd consider dm/lvm industry standard. Hence I actually don't know if you could use the md-module of unRAID as usual, for let's say a MD-RAID5...I've never felt tempted to do so.

 

As we don't see a modified mdadm source from limetech shipped with unRAID, the interface either did not change or is not used by unRAID at all.  ;)

Link to comment

nice thread, will have to take some time to digest it properly, quick thing ive been mulling over, does the unraid md patch stop you using mdadm to manage a seperate array? or does it just add features?

 

(silly question but surely i cant be the only one wondering and didn't see it mentioned in any of the other threads)

 

IMHO that is not a silly question at all.

 

md, since the introduction of dm (and with that comes the usage of LVM2), is pretty "dead", as the combo of dm/lvm is much more flexible....and the two (md/dm) can co-exist in the kernel.

I'd consider dm/lvm industry standard. Hence I actually don't know if you could use the md-module of unRAID as usual, for let's say a MD-RAID5...I've never felt tempted to do so.

 

As we don't see a modified mdadm source from limetech shipped with unRAID, the interface either did not change or is not used by unRAID at all.  ;)

 

 

The whole md subsystem is replaced by unraid's version of the md subsystem.

mdadm is not available for unraid. it was never used by unRAID. emhttp is used to manage the array.

Link to comment

thanking you, figured as much but wanted to make sure i wasnt crazy when did this dm thing become standard

  :'(

that'll teach me for not doing any "heavy" linux work in 4years+ and trying to jump right back in

 

 

edit: i knew i was right, linux software raid googling leads mainly to mdadm (which makes sense i guess)

 

 

 

editedit: weirdly enough all this last couple months crazyness leading me into more investigation and planning of what i'd actually like my server to achieve i'm leaving towards windows2012 storage server with snapraid, dont like the interface but that + drive pooling does seem to fit my needs better.... if the unraid array cannot coexist with another array especially

(more comfortable in the wintel world)

Link to comment

edit5000: wikipedia says this for dm

 

raid: offers an interface to the Linux kernel's software RAID driver (md)

 

 

 

so doesnt WeeboTech comment stand that it wont work?

 

edit: most of the docs i find regarding dm+lvm talk about it interfacing with mdadm

Link to comment

I feel I should update you all on the current state of things.

 

Before Xmas there was a flurry of forum activity and discussion surrounding the OS-edition. I had a reply from Tom alluding that he would indeed be interested in working with me on this project, and was in the process of re-writing his business plan to accommodate me etc. You already know this though.

 

Over the last 3-4 weeks I've been running my unRAID server using Arch and it's been pretty much perfect, any issues I've had are my own fault through updating stuff or changing stuff without thinking. So, the OS-edition is pretty much ready to go (although I would hesitate to release under any guise other than ALPHA) and I know several of you along with grumpy have got it working on your systems too.

 

I have sent Tom a few emails, a few of which have gone unanswered during his illness / bereavement period. My latest email to him, yesterday, is yet to be answered after I had several replies within hours. The difference in the final email was I was asking for answers. It seems that decisions haven't been made yet and it's incredibly frustrating. Maybe there's a good reason for this but I have to be honest it's impossible to work like this.

 

I'm not throwing in the towel yet but really urge anyone who knows Tom closely to get in touch with him and really hammer home what an opportunity this is. Myself and others have tried hard to get the unRAID ship to welcome us onboard to help with development. Tom, PLEASE listen, please reply and please comment publicly on whether this effort of mine / grumpy's is a waste of time or not. I'm not issuing a time based ultimatum here but I think over a month is a bit daft to answer yes or no on whether unRAID-OS-Edition would get your blessing or not.

 

Once we have this answer we can share our work with you and the community, until then I will not do so for fear of violating any licensing distribution rules. Then we can move toward some kind of release, however 'go it alone' that release may be in terms of official support.

Link to comment

I feel I should update you all on the current state of things.

 

Before Xmas there was a flurry of forum activity and discussion surrounding the OS-edition. I had a reply from Tom alluding that he would indeed be interested in working with me on this project, and was in the process of re-writing his business plan to accommodate me etc. You already know this though.

 

Over the last 3-4 weeks I've been running my unRAID server using Arch and it's been pretty much perfect, any issues I've had are my own fault through updating stuff or changing stuff without thinking. So, the OS-edition is pretty much ready to go (although I would hesitate to release under any guise other than ALPHA) and I know several of you along with grumpy have got it working on your systems too.

 

I have sent Tom a few emails, a few of which have gone unanswered during his illness / bereavement period. My latest email to him, yesterday, is yet to be answered after I had several replies within hours. The difference in the final email was I was asking for answers. It seems that decisions haven't been made yet and it's incredibly frustrating. Maybe there's a good reason for this but I have to be honest it's impossible to work like this.

 

I'm not throwing in the towel yet but really urge anyone who knows Tom closely to get in touch with him and really hammer home what an opportunity this is. Myself and others have tried hard to get the unRAID ship to welcome us onboard to help with development. Tom, PLEASE listen, please reply and please comment publicly on whether this effort of mine / grumpy's is a waste of time or not. I'm not issuing a time based ultimatum here but I think over a month is a bit daft to answer yes or no on whether unRAID-OS-Edition would get your blessing or not.

 

Once we have this answer we can share our work with you and the community, until then I will not do so for fear of violating any licensing distribution rules. Then we can move toward some kind of release, however 'go it alone' that release may be in terms of official support.

What you do not seem to grasp is that Tom and LimeTech already have a plan as far as there current product (the appliance model one) goes.  Tom has already posted that road map publicly.

 

Dropping development in the middle of the above stated road map would just upset a lot of the current unRAID user base that is waiting for a 64-bit appliance release.  Lime Tech may have made the decision to work towards a full OS edition but he can't stop work on what is currently being done, it is not that simple.

 

Reworking a business to go to a full OS edition is likely not as simple as you think it is.  It appears simple to you as you can set it up on your machine and say "Here it is done" it is NOT that simple for a business, selling a product that they support, to do.

 

 

I am not trying to be mean or anything like that.  This is coming from my viewpoint as a business owner myself.  You spend a lot of time making sure you have the correct plan laid out and that you are not abandoning your current user base in the process.

Link to comment

edit5000: wikipedia says this for dm

 

raid: offers an interface to the Linux kernel's software RAID driver (md)

 

so doesnt WeeboTech comment stand that it wont work?

 

edit: most of the docs i find regarding dm+lvm talk about it interfacing with mdadm

 

mdadm is for the multidisk driver.

http://linux.die.net/man/4/md

 

unraid replaced that whole layer, mdadm will not work 'for the unraid' array.

It could work with the co-existing dm and lvm layer.

 

This is a bit beyond me. I'm very familiar with the md raid layer since it's early inception.

I did raid1 back when you had to run a special command to re-sync the array before mounting it.

8GB drives were considered big back then (just to give you a time perspective).

 

I stopped using the standard linux md layer about 5 years ago when I started to use unRAID.

 

Since that time(for me) dm/lvm2 seem to have incorporated another software raid layer.

mdadm should work fine with this.  I'll let someone more knowledgeable answer on that.

Link to comment

I feel I should update you all on the current state of things.

 

Before Xmas there was a flurry of forum activity and discussion surrounding the OS-edition. I had a reply from Tom alluding that he would indeed be interested in working with me on this project, and was in the process of re-writing his business plan to accommodate me etc. You already know this though.

 

Over the last 3-4 weeks I've been running my unRAID server using Arch and it's been pretty much perfect, any issues I've had are my own fault through updating stuff or changing stuff without thinking. So, the OS-edition is pretty much ready to go (although I would hesitate to release under any guise other than ALPHA) and I know several of you along with grumpy have got it working on your systems too.

 

I have sent Tom a few emails, a few of which have gone unanswered during his illness / bereavement period. My latest email to him, yesterday, is yet to be answered after I had several replies within hours. The difference in the final email was I was asking for answers. It seems that decisions haven't been made yet and it's incredibly frustrating. Maybe there's a good reason for this but I have to be honest it's impossible to work like this.

 

I'm not throwing in the towel yet but really urge anyone who knows Tom closely to get in touch with him and really hammer home what an opportunity this is. Myself and others have tried hard to get the unRAID ship to welcome us onboard to help with development. Tom, PLEASE listen, please reply and please comment publicly on whether this effort of mine / grumpy's is a waste of time or not. I'm not issuing a time based ultimatum here but I think over a month is a bit daft to answer yes or no on whether unRAID-OS-Edition would get your blessing or not.

 

Once we have this answer we can share our work with you and the community, until then I will not do so for fear of violating any licensing distribution rules. Then we can move toward some kind of release, however 'go it alone' that release may be in terms of official support.

What you do not seem to grasp is that Tom and LimeTech already have a plan as far as there current product (the appliance model one) goes.  Tom has already posted that road map publicly.

 

Dropping development in the middle of the above stated road map would just upset a lot of the current unRAID user base that is waiting for a 64-bit appliance release.  Lime Tech may have made the decision to work towards a full OS edition but he can't stop work on what is currently being done, it is not that simple.

 

Reworking a business to go to a full OS edition is likely not as simple as you think it is.  It appears simple to you as you can set it up on your machine and say "Here it is done" it is NOT that simple for a business, selling a product that they support, to do.

 

 

I am not trying to be mean or anything like that.  This is coming from my viewpoint as a business owner myself.  You spend a lot of time making sure you have the correct plan laid out and that you are not abandoning your current user base in the process.

 

I didn't mean it quite like that... I'm not looking for Tom to drop his current work I was actually hoping to be included in the development myself and have proven that I can be quite self-sufficient without much need for baby sitting. I envisage Tom continuing as is and myself looking after the OS-edition.

 

I guess all I want some kind of regular dialog or firm answer one way or the other as opposed to the sporadic silence. I shouldn't moan in public though.

Link to comment

edit5000: wikipedia says this for dm

 

raid: offers an interface to the Linux kernel's software RAID driver (md)

 

 

 

so doesnt WeeboTech comment stand that it wont work?

 

edit: most of the docs i find regarding dm+lvm talk about it interfacing with mdadm

 

Well, mdadm is the userland tool (befaore that there was mdctl...I *think*...long time ago  :o) for the md module, which forms the "real software raid" in linux....dm_mod is just a convenience layer, along with LVM2.

All I am saying is that linux isn't that hardcore anymore...the other tools grew up and made using md/mdadm more easy.

 

Coming back to your question as I understood it, is that - although the unRAID md-module is a derivative work of the "orginal" md-module, this does

not imply that the non-unRAID raid-modes are still preset and usable in the binary (usable by mdadm)

In unRAID the userland interface is baked in emhttp binary, so we do not know.

Link to comment

I stopped using the standard linux md layer about 5 years ago when I started to use unRAID.

 

Since that time(for me) dm/lvm2 seem to have incorporated another software raid layer.

mdadm should work fine with this.  I'll let someone more knowledgeable answer on that.

 

...same with me here.

What is confusing is that the raid devices are still named "mdX", whilst dm_mod is doing all the work.

I just tried to google the md vs dm_mod stuff but did not succeed...I *remember* that there has been some info about it, but also I am balding fast  ;D

Link to comment

I think I might have to give up on my attempt to get it working in CentOS. I can't get the kernel to run. I must be missing something, but I have no idea what.

 

I'm following the wiki guide to install unraid on a full slackware install, but using CentOS instead of slack.

 

I've got the kernel sources for the same kernel version as in unraid 5.0.4, copied the unraid config and md driver files. I then run make menuconfig - and this is where I must be going wrong, as I have no idea what should/shouldn't be enabled.

 

I've followed the recommendations in the slackware guide as best I can and enabled all that it says. But when I finish, then build and install the kernel. When I try to reboot into the new kernel I get a kernel panic.

 

Have tried redoing the config and adding more drivers to the kernel (mostly just ones that sound like they might be needed) but always get the same result.

 

I'm trying all of this in a Virtualbox VM

 

I did give up on trying to get CentOS 6.5 to work - I just couldn't get the kernel to run.

 

However I have had more luck with Arch Linux. I have been able to build the kernel, and get system to run emhttp. Resulting in being able to run the array.

 

Am pretty sure that a load of stuff won't work properly as I didn't know hat to do with all of the init scripts from /etc/rc.d. Obviously they need translating to work with system somehow?

 

Can anyone who has gotten unraid working on Arch (or any other system based distro) please advise me how to get the init scripts moved over?

Link to comment

I think I might have to give up on my attempt to get it working in CentOS. I can't get the kernel to run. I must be missing something, but I have no idea what.

 

I'm following the wiki guide to install unraid on a full slackware install, but using CentOS instead of slack.

 

I've got the kernel sources for the same kernel version as in unraid 5.0.4, copied the unraid config and md driver files. I then run make menuconfig - and this is where I must be going wrong, as I have no idea what should/shouldn't be enabled.

 

I've followed the recommendations in the slackware guide as best I can and enabled all that it says. But when I finish, then build and install the kernel. When I try to reboot into the new kernel I get a kernel panic.

 

Have tried redoing the config and adding more drivers to the kernel (mostly just ones that sound like they might be needed) but always get the same result.

 

I'm trying all of this in a Virtualbox VM

 

I did give up on trying to get CentOS 6.5 to work - I just couldn't get the kernel to run.

 

However I have had more luck with Arch Linux. I have been able to build the kernel, and get system to run emhttp. Resulting in being able to run the array.

 

Am pretty sure that a load of stuff won't work properly as I didn't know hat to do with all of the init scripts from /etc/rc.d. Obviously they need translating to work with system somehow?

 

Can anyone who has gotten unraid working on Arch (or any other system based distro) please advise me how to get the init scripts moved over?

 

Great news, however I'm pretty sure this is all futile as Tom has said a brand new x64 version of emhttp is coming 'any day now'.

Link to comment

...You can add all your unRAID drives and have immediate access to your data and at your leisure convert each drive from Rieser to BTRFS, EXT4, XFS (a good File System for large files like Media), etc. without having to migrate your data.

 

Can/will this system convert to a new file system in 'real time', or will we need to 'copy' the data to a new drive/location and the conversion will happen as the files are moved?  Basically, do I need another large drive to facilitate this conversion?

 

On another related note, I've seen a few mentions of H.265 being able to reduce file sized from 35-55%, and that's if one doesn't crop files, and tweak encoding settings in addition.  I have most everything stored as mkv files without re-encoding anything, just removed unnecessary streams, subtitles, versions and extras.

 

Can the conversion to H.265 be done in conjunction with the file type conversion?

 

File checksum, encryption, fix silent errors, up to six drives for parity, each disk has a filesystem like unRAID (you can even use different ones on each drive), only spin up one drive, can use with any drive that already has data (your unRAID drives will work fine),..., use any number of drives, sizes, add / remove drives no problem...

 

Most/all the reasons I went with unRAID in the first place, only this is more and better!

 

It's not a realtime "RAID" like unRAID or ZFS but since most of you are storing TV Shows, Movies and Music... so what. Basically you back up your "raid" every night (once a week or whatever). All your data (TV Shows / Movies / Music / etc.) are backed up and file level chksums are done to verify all your data to your parity drive(s). Set it up to email you with the status report or whatever.

 

What do you mean "back up your raid every..."?  I don't currently have enough space to backup the whole dataset, so do you mean 'back up the raid configuration', or something else?

 

Either way, I'm excited to see this coming, and if I can't get it 'pre-built' in the next month, learning to do it will be my next project.

 

**Out of curiosity, will this allow me to download, convert, encode, playback, copy/move files from multiple locations without any 'hiccups' in the playback of media?

 

Currently, if SABnzbd unpacks, converts, moves a file, my playback stutters.  If I'm copying files around on the array, video playback suffers.  This happens both over wifi and wired gigabit networks.

 

Anyway, I'm looking forward to the future :)

Link to comment

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.