unRAID Server Release 6.0-beta9-x86_64 Available


limetech

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 154
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

I had a bad experience running unRAID as a VM under a Linux Mint KVM. To make a long story short, I ended up losing all my data on one drive and cache drive (luckily I have backups). Went back to running unRAID as bare metal and no problems since. I will not be trying to run unRAID as a VM again...

Curious. Did this happen after running it as a VM for a while or almost immediately?  Good info for a future blog post.  Feel free to PM me with details if you feel up to it.  Getting real stories from real users would be very good...

Alright but get ready for my life story...

 

*ahem* jonp, please take this to a new thread or to PM and try to keep this thread related to actual items related to beta9 release. ;D

LOL.  Hence why I asked him to send me a PM!!!

Link to comment

hehe following you around the forum now :-)

 

this is your issue:-

 devid    1 size 10.00GiB used 10.00GiB path /dev/loop8

 

you need to extend the size of your docker image, as you have used up all allocated space (10GB).

I thought unRAID was meant to automatically allocate more space if it is required?

I think you are thinking of drive auto expansion that was removed temporarily in an earlier beta and restored in beta 9.  The docker image presently doesn't auto expand like tom said but also like tom had mentioned, that's a great idea for a feature...

 

on the other hand, i don't know what else you have running there, it looks kinda very space consuming

 

looks like that for me:

Total devices 1 FS bytes used 1.71GiB

devid    1 size 15.00GiB used 4.04GiB path /dev/loop8

 

i allowed for some more space from beginning, but beside that its a unraid 6b9 install with madsonic. i have shitloads of music on there (if that even affect this settings - no clue), but all is running smooth

Link to comment

Jon - while I agree this approach best for final releases,  for beta releases these experiences in a consolidated thread help other users from earlier versions decide whether they want to upgrade or not. Alternatively having a dedicated thread for beta9 issues would be helpful instead of potential upgrade users trying to wade through a general support forun .

Issues like this should be moved to general support for assistance and remediation.  This thread should be reserved for questions about the release, not problems post upgrade.  Thanks!

I understand for problems getting it set up and going, but not for problems related to the beta. Better way of asking the question:

 

Do you want to make it easier for users to find out what bugs may exist in a beta or easier for Lime Tech to fix those bugs?

 

just to chime in on that - both!!! primarily make it easier to fix, but also give other users an idea what they are getting into. so maybe posting in both threads is an alternative for the time being!?

you could turn this question also around - you want ppl to get into 6b9 with eyes open or spend sh*tloads of time to explain known issues (time that goes away from working on the next release)

 

cheers, L

Link to comment

Has anyone else had the experience of their unraid server becoming completely unresponsive after upgrading to Beta9.  99% of the time, it's been working fine since upgrade.  In fact, maybe a very tiny bit better than it used to. 

 

But the unresponsiveness behavior is very annoying, because when it happens, I don't know if it's the standard unresponsiveness that happens sometimes when the server hasn't been used for several hours, and the drives need to spinup, or if it's something worse happening.  If the complete unresponsiveness is going to happen, it's much more likely to happen in the morning after my drives have been spun down for a while. 

 

I have the mover set to run at the default 3:40am time.  When this unresponsiveness happens in the morning, I have to hard boot the server to get it back up again.  And in the gui I can see that the mover did not run overnight.  So it's not just the webgui that has stopped functioning, or a samba problem because I can't get to the shares on Windows 7, the linux software that allows the mover to run also stopped functioning. 

 

Also, and I don't know if this is related or not.  The power down function no longer works either after upgrading to Beta9.  There was another thread on the board somewhere, where someone else reported this behavior, and I posted that it happens to me to.  The Reboot function appears to still be working, but not power down.  I end up having to do a hard shutdown when I want the server to shutdown. 

 

I don't shutdown the server that frequently, I usually just reboot it when the need for that sort of thing arises.  So honestly I'm not sure if that is a Beta9 thing or not.    I know it used to work, on unraid 5.05, but I couldn't say at what point it stopped working, as I've uses a couple of the 6 beta's. 

Link to comment

Has anyone else had the experience of their unraid server becoming completely unresponsive after upgrading to Beta9.

 

I find that, sometimes, the web gui appears to lock up - it can take up to a minute for it to respond.  No idea what causes it and there's nothing of note in the syslog.

Link to comment

Has anyone else had the experience of their unraid server becoming completely unresponsive after upgrading to Beta9.

 

I find that, sometimes, the web gui appears to lock up - it can take up to a minute for it to respond.  No idea what causes it and there's nothing of note in the syslog.

In my experience, and what I've seen written by others, that's just unraid.  Sometimes it locks up for a minute.  Not really locking up though, it's doing something like reading from a drive usually.  Pulling it's file system into active memory or something.  I'm sure there are others here who could explain much better than I. 

 

I think the cache dirs plugin is supposed to help with this by keeping the drive file system in active memory, but I've never fooled around with it personally. 

Link to comment

I had run several dd performance test across all 3 and did see any noticeable difference in performance.

 

Through several crashes, I had unrecoverable errors on some files under almost every BTRFS filesystem, but none on the others, so I personally wont trust that filesystem with array data for some time...

Link to comment

I haven't even tried unRAID6 yet, I don't want to risk my data.

 

If I understand correctly, it is possible to use XFS or BTRFS for Array? If so, did it help to increase write performance on array?

from what I've read so far in the forums... the performance is roughly the same.

 

Large files operations are considerably faster with BTRFS and XFS.

Link to comment

anyone minds to elaborate a little on the 6b10x1 update you can install thru the gui???? i hate to install stuff without explanations what was changes/ why i need it  8)

 

maybe sth to consider as well. to place a short changes log with the update under extentions

I do not have that showing as an option! 

 

I know that there has been talk of supporting upgrades via the GUI, but I would not expect beta 10 to arrive without an announcement in the forum?

Link to comment

i just bit the bullet and installed it - immediate changes i noticed are in the layout of the gui dockerman and linux is updated to 3.16.3

there might be more. as i said, couldn't find a changelog.

 

also, it might be useful to give ppl some guidance how to proceed with this way of updating. i just stopped my array, did the update and rebooted my server. looks like that did it. and running now 6.0beta10-x1

 

 

cheers, L

 

ps: plugins and docker have now separate tabs as well, forgot to mention that.

Link to comment

ok the release notes can be found under tools - release notes:

 

Summary of changes from 6.0-beta9 to 6.0-beta10

-----------------------------------------------

- avahi: fix issue with OSX causing "Invalid response packet from host" messages.

- dhcpcd: use the hardware address of the interface for the Client ID.

- emhttp: improve http connection handling

- emhttp: when cache device re-assigned set file system type to 'auto'

- emhttp: fix issue creating cache-only share following cache device format completion

- linux: update to 3.16.3 (reiserfs corruption patch built-in)

- linux: support all Winbond h/w monitor chips

- netatalk: update to 3.1.6

- slack: fixed rsyslog syslog rotation

- slack: fixed acpi power-button event

- slack: don't start AFP in rc.M

- slack: inetd.conf: comment out unused comsat and auth services

- slack: update bash to 4.2.048 (shellshock bug fix)

- plgMan: version 2014.09.12

- webGui: added 'Default file system' on Disk Settings page (default is XFS)

 

it would be great to see them before updating!

 

cheers, L

Link to comment

I too updated last night 6.0~beta10-x1 and everything seems to be running really well.  No issues yet.

I wonder why it appears several people can see the beta 10 update, but others (e.g. myself) cannot.  Are you perhaps running a version of the GUI that has been updated past that supplied with beta 9?

Link to comment

I too updated last night 6.0~beta10-x1 and everything seems to be running really well.  No issues yet.

I wonder why it appears several people can see the beta 10 update, but others (e.g. myself) cannot.  Are you perhaps running a version of the GUI that has been updated past that supplied with beta 9?

 

i am running stock 6b9.

i remember there was sth to change on flashdrive in regards to the dockerman integration, which i did at the time. but i can't see that would affect the unraid-update function really.

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.