Planning first unRAID build

[ZeroT]

I am about to embark on building my first unRAID box and I'm just after a couple of questions answered, the box is just going to be for storage of movies, tv, photos & music and will be running the plex server plugin.

 

I have a new N54L box coming with 4gb RAM, so the first question is that enough RAM?

 

I plan on installing 2x 3TB drives, one for data, one for parity and adding a 2nd 3TB data drive a few months down the line, no problems here I assume?

 

Finally, which version of unRAID should I go for, 5 or 6, if I go for 5 will there be a straight upgrade to 6, or should I go for 6 beta or possibly even wait for the final RC of 6?

 

Thanks in advance.

[itimpi]

4GB of ram is more than enough if you plan to run a vanilla unRAID system.  If you are going to want to run resource heavy plugins or make use of virtualisation features then that may not be enough.

 

As to whether to go with v5 or v6 I think either is OK.  The upgrade path from v5 to v6 is very easy.  Which you pick really depends on whether you are interesting in experimenting with the new features that are coming with v6 or want to stick with a stable system that will not change (there ware expected to be new betas for v6 before general release).  For basic unRAID they are very much on a par with each other, and if anything v6 is slightly more responsive (in my view) as it can exploit 64-bit hardware 

 

In theory v6 is scheduled to reach general release status by the end of next month - although whether Limetech will achieve this goal is still unclear.

[ZeroT]

The N54L is 64-bit so that's quite tempting to go for v6

 

Are there any issues with the plugins for v5 working on v6?  Getting the plex plugin working from day 1 is quite important as it is replacing my current windows server doing the same job.

[itimpi]

The N54L is 64-bit so that's quite tempting to go for v6

 

Are there any issues with the plugins for v5 working on v6?  Getting the plex plugin working from day 1 is quite important as it is replacing my current windows server doing the same job.

v5 plugins do not work on v6 as they are 32-bit and v6 requires 64-bit.  There are 64-bit versions of most plugins.

 

However with v6 the recommended way to add functionality is using docker instead of plugins (as they are far less likely to destabilize the unRAID base).  There are already docker containers for most commonly requested apps with the list continually growing, and I am reasonably certain that Plex is one of them (look in the Docker sub-forum for more information).

 

If you are just starting up then v6 makes more sense as switching from v5 to v6 will be far more error prone if you are using plugins, and you may want to start with the docker based solutions from the outset.  Note, however, that to make use of docker with v6 you need to have a drive that can be formatted as btrfs.  This can either be the cache drive or a drive that is not part of the array.

[ZeroT]

Hmm, this Docker info has disheartened me slightly, for my particular user case anyway.

 

From what I understand to use plex for example, I need another dedicated drive for Docker, which installs a Ubuntu base image, and then virtualises each of my "plugin" apps, in this case plex.

 

That seems like a lot of extra overhead to run one "plugin"?

 

For lots of plugins and specifically those not designed for unraid I can see the benefit but for my user case of only needing plex I'm not convinced, I could be wrong?

[itimpi]

Hmm, this Docker info has disheartened me slightly, for my particular user case anyway.

 

From what I understand to use plex for example, I need another dedicated drive for Docker, which installs a Ubuntu base image, and then virtualises each of my "plugin" apps, in this case plex.

 

That seems like a lot of extra overhead to run one "plugin"?

 

For lots of plugins and specifically those not designed for unraid I can see the benefit but for my user case of only needing plex I'm not convinced, I could be wrong?

Plugins on v5 have a history of occasionally causing system stability - particularly ones that are RAM hungry (which is the driver to using docker instead on v6).

 

At the moment docker on unRAID v6 does require a drive that is in btrfs format (although it could be your cache drive).  This is to significantly reduce the space overhead of running multiple docker containers.  Note that the drive is not dedicated to docker - it is just that v6 requires that the drive used by docker be in btrfs format.  Another point is that the latest status update from Limetech on v6 beta 7 (due imminently) has stated that btrfs will also be available as an alternative to btrfs for the array data drives so the requirement for a non-data drive in btrfs format may well disappear in the near future.  However until beta 7 has actually arrived and we have tried it that is just speculation.

 

If you need to get things working with minimum risk ASAP then perhaps v5 is the way to go.  However it may mean the move to v6 (if you want to do it) at a later date may be more work.

[ZeroT]

Ok that's quite interesting, thanks.

 

With only needing a relatively small NAS 2 data drives + 1 parity I am able to use the Free Licence of unRAID, adding a 4th drive just to be able to use Docker means the need for the Plus Licence.  Purchasing a licence myself may well happen in the future but the need for Plus just to use Docker could push potential users into finding a different solution.  Hopefully Docker will be able to work with the 3 drive limit in future version.

 

I think I am going to hold off until beta 7 and try that, I don't need to decide ASAP as I have a current server doing the job that is going to be replaced, its more important that when I make the choice for the new server that its the right one and it all works from day 1 of it coming into service.

[SSD]

Ok that's quite interesting, thanks.

 

With only needing a relatively small NAS 2 data drives + 1 parity I am able to use the Free Licence of unRAID, adding a 4th drive just to be able to use Docker means the need for the Plus Licence.  Purchasing a licence myself may well happen in the future but the need for Plus just to use Docker could push potential users into finding a different solution.  Hopefully Docker will be able to work with the 3 drive limit in future version.

 

I think I am going to hold off until beta 7 and try that, I don't need to decide ASAP as I have a current server doing the job that is going to be replaced, its more important that when I make the choice for the new server that its the right one and it all works from day 1 of it coming into service.

 

You can add the btrfs outside the array and run it alongside with the free license.

 

If you are going to look to install things like SickBeard and Sabnzbd, I suggest moving directly the 6.0. If you are like most new users, you will be skeptical and not 100% trust your new server and unRAID until you get some experience. Likely you'll be better than most about having backups, etc. through this period. 6.0 is a solid release which many have used to protect their data for months. I would hold off moving to beta7 until at least a few weeks go by. But moving from 6b6 to 6b7 will likely be very simple, whereas moving from 5.0.5 to 6.0 will require a lot more work.

 

Like I said, I'd go with 6/6b if I were setting up a new array. And test the heck out of it until I was comfortable.

[dikkiedirk]

Hmm, this Docker info has disheartened me slightly, for my particular user case anyway.

 

From what I understand to use plex for example, I need another dedicated drive for Docker, which installs a Ubuntu base image, and then virtualises each of my "plugin" apps, in this case plex.

 

That seems like a lot of extra overhead to run one "plugin"?

 

For lots of plugins and specifically those not designed for unraid I can see the benefit but for my user case of only needing plex I'm not convinced, I could be wrong?

 

I just made the move to V6 and still don't use dockerized versions of my plugins. I use the sabnzb64bit plugin a lot. I also have serviio64bit installed and the cache_dirs script. What made me move was running out of  LOW memory frequently and loosing the WEBGUI because of that. My servers seem more responsive now.

[itimpi]

Ok that's quite interesting, thanks.

 

With only needing a relatively small NAS 2 data drives + 1 parity I am able to use the Free Licence of unRAID, adding a 4th drive just to be able to use Docker means the need for the Plus Licence.  Purchasing a licence myself may well happen in the future but the need for Plus just to use Docker could push potential users into finding a different solution.  Hopefully Docker will be able to work with the 3 drive limit in future version.

There is no need for the drive hosting docker to be part of the unRAID array (and thus affected by the 3-drive limit).  Many people seem to be going for a smallish SSD that is not part of the array to maximise performance. I personally use a little 2.5" drive that has been recycled from a laptop.

I think I am going to hold off until beta 7 and try that, I don't need to decide ASAP as I have a current server doing the job that is going to be replaced, its more important that when I make the choice for the new server that its the right one and it all works from day 1 of it coming into service.

If your timescales allow for that it makes sense.  It also gives a chance for docker containers and/or plugins to reach a more mature state on v6

[ZeroT]

Thanks for all the replies, I have to say the community forum & friendliness is another reason I'm looking at unRIAD!

 

I spent most of yesterday evening reading up and I'm already considering the Plus Licence option to be able to use a cache drive, the increase in speed will be worth the cost.

 

Am I right in thinking the cache is while visible if you browse to it is effectively transparent, if you access a share on the data drives and write to it you are actually writing to the cache drive and that will be moved onto the data drive by the mover.  If you access the cache drive directly for say temp storage/scratch data then that data if ignored by the mover and remains on the cache drive.

[JonathanM]

If you access the cache drive directly for say temp storage/scratch data then that data if ignored by the mover and remains on the cache drive.

Actually it's a little more complicated than that. The concept of user shares is what's in play here, simply stated, any folder in the root of any array drive or the cache drive is considered a user share, and can be modified in many different ways. Shared over the network or not, use the cache drive for incoming writes or not or don't move to the array but keep on the cache drive, allow certain users access rights or not, etc. You can always opt to directly access the disk shares, including the cache disk, but user shares are used to determine what stays on the cache and what is moved, and where.

[ZeroT]

Thanks for that, sounds like there are a lot of options available.  I'm guessing there is no way to see or trial these options before buying the Plus licence either?

[jevans04]

Am I right in thinking the cache is while visible if you browse to it is effectively transparent, if you access a share on the data drives and write to it you are actually writing to the cache drive and that will be moved onto the data drive by the mover.  If you access the cache drive directly for say temp storage/scratch data then that data if ignored by the mover and remains on the cache drive.

 

Yes, if you set your share folders to use the cache drive, you can write directly to the share folder and the data will get written immediately to the cache drive and then moved to an array drive later by the mover at the scheduled time.

 

And you can create a "cache-only" folder on the cache drive that you can write to for temp/scratch data.  The cache-only folder will be ignored by the mover and the data will not be moved to a protected array drive.

[switchman]

Is a N54L capable of running Plex?  I am assuming some of your media will require transcoding.

[ZeroT]

yes the N54L is well tested with Plex, lots of people using them, can struggle with 1080p transcoding but no probs at all with 720p.

[ZeroT]

Well a month has passed and I still haven't decided!  and in that time 3 more beta versions have also passed.

 

I finally received my drives yesterday, 2x 3TB Reds and a 100Gb SSD, I will be using 1 data drive, 1 parity and 1 cache on a Plus licence with obvious room to add more data drives as I need them.  I'm sure many of you cannot comprehend why I need so 'little' storage but at the moment that's all I need.

 

Anyway, the 2 HDD's are on a 3 cycle pre-clear at the moment which I going to take a few days to complete and then I'm all set to decide on where to go from there.  I am currently using v5 so that I can at least boot off something for the pre-clear.

 

Is there any vague speculation on how many more beta's there will be before v6 goes RC, or is that a how long is a piece of string question.

[megalodon]

No one really knows. Im on V5.05 and Im happy with that for the moment. If your new to unRAID and do't want to add loads of plugins then V5.05 will be fine for you. I use Dynamix as the webGui and install their plugins direct from the web interface. For simplicity I would just carry on using v5.05. Give V6 more time to get to release stage and fully mature and then make the move. The speed difference between 32bit and 64bit is not really going to make a major difference to you and you can spend time getting to know and understand unRAID without having to worry about Docker and possible bugs. Just my opinion but its up to you at the end of the day.

[ZeroT]

I think you're right, I think I will stick with 5.05 and let 6 go RC and get a bit of time under it's belt before upgrading. 

 

I only want to use one plugin, plex, so as long as I can use that and trust the software with my data then 5.05 seems to be the way to go.

 

The 3 cycle pre-clear is taking an age though so still got a few days before I can use it in anger!

[neilt0]

FYI, I'm running 6.0 on an N54L. Docker is much better and easier than I thought it'd be. nzbget runs about as fast in a Docker as in "raw" form.

 

It's even faster after formatting the cache drive to BTRFS.

 

However, 6.0 is still Beta, so you may want to wait for the RC. I upgraded from 5.x to 6.x in about 11 minutes, so it's pretty easy to do. You may have to replace some/all of your apps/plugins from 5.x, but it's not too tricky, thanks to the excellent Dockers and plugins.

 

I pimped my N54L out with 8 drives. It's a great box: