Jump to content
magistratee

Disk Shares (SMB vs NFS), User Shares, Split Levels - Options/Questions?

14 posts in this topic Last Reply

Recommended Posts

I know this post here is nearly a year old thats why I made a new topic here because I just finished building my first unRAID server (for the most part at least) and I was playing with the SHARES options that unraid offers and was lead here.  Hopefully some of you can clarify and answer my questions to these options here.

 

In the visual explanation:

0  Disk1

    |

1   Videos (User Share) THIS WILL SPAN DISKS

      |

2     --Movies (Directory)

        |

3       --DVDs (Directory)

          |

4         --[Movie Title 1] (Directory)

          |  |

          |  VIDEO_TS (Directory)

          |    .VOB file

          |    .VOB file

          |

4         --[Movie Title 2] (Directory)

             |

             --VIDEO_TS (Directory)

               .VOB file

               .VOB file             

 

You want split level set to 3...

 

From what I read this is saying at SPLIT LEVEL 3 that If I want to make a folder in level 4 then that means the files in any of the folders in level 4 will be placed on the same drive.  'Can I generalize this in saying that if I make a SPLIT LEVEL X that means all the files/folders in folders LEVEL X+1 will be placed in the same disk.'  Does that mean that all files and folders created between LEVEL 0 to LEVEL X (including level 0 and level x) can span disks according to the allocation method chosen.  How about separate files created at level X+1, do these span disks as well?  If several directories then files are created after LEVEL X+1 does that mean that those directories/files will be placed on the same disk as the disk of where LEVEL X+1 was placed.

 

Is there a way for a user share to have more than one split level.  What I mean by this is say I take different routes from the parent folder, one route takes me to level 5 another takes me to level 7.  I want a different split level for files/folders at level 5 than I do at level 7 even though they are still under the same parents.  Say for example I had a share folder for all my family vacation/events which consists of videos/dvds/music/etc...  I am assuming this is impossible right?

 

Also since we are taking about shares I had a question about SMB/NFS Export differences.  I do not know what these stand for so these are my assumptions from what I read around here.  SMB is a general share which applies to all users that you specify and all those users have the same access rights (depending if placed on the include/exclude), correct?  NFS is more specific and applies to specific users/PCs to specific share access rights.

 

Am I correct in these statements?

 

For NFS exports I found this in the FAQ.

To export the share to 192.168.1.10 read-only, and 192.168.1.12 read/write, enter:

 

192.168.1.10(rw),192.168.1.12(rw)

These are the options correct: r-read, w-write, rw-read&write

Can I change the IP to the PC name or a user name specified in the users menu such as PC1®,PC2(rw) or user1®,user2(rw) instead of the IP numbers?  example-  I want three users connecting to a share.  I want one to not be able to see it, one able to read only, and one to do read or write on it.  How would this be done.

 

Sorry with the X's and other way of explaining things.  If you have problems understanding I can explain it clearer.  Thanks for the help.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

I know this post here is nearly a year old thats why I made a new topic here because I just finished building my first unRAID server (for the most part at least) and I was playing with the SHARES options that unraid offers and was lead here.  Hopefully some of you can clarify and answer my questions to these options here.

 

In the visual explanation:

0  Disk1

    |

1   Videos (User Share) THIS WILL SPAN DISKS

      |

2     --Movies (Directory)

        |

3       --DVDs (Directory)

          |

4         --[Movie Title 1] (Directory)

          |  |

          |  VIDEO_TS (Directory)

          |    .VOB file

          |    .VOB file

          |

4         --[Movie Title 2] (Directory)

             |

             --VIDEO_TS (Directory)

               .VOB file

               .VOB file             

 

You want split level set to 3...

 

From what I read this is saying at SPLIT LEVEL 3 that If I want to make a folder in level 4 then that means the files in any of the folders in level 4 will be placed on the same drive.  'Can I generalize this in saying that if I make a SPLIT LEVEL X that means all the files/folders in folders LEVEL X+1 will be placed in the same disk.'  Does that mean that all files and folders created between LEVEL 0 to LEVEL X (including level 0 and level x) can span disks according to the allocation method chosen.  How about separate files created at level X+1, do these span disks as well?  If several directories then files are created after LEVEL X+1 does that mean that those directories/files will be placed on the same disk as the disk of where LEVEL X+1 was placed.

 

There is an old addage that if a feature is too hard to explain in the documentation, that it needs to be redesigned.  (No offense to Tom, but nothing seems harder to explain then these split levels!)

 

The most clear explanations have been with examples, but I'm doing to try to NOT use examples ... and also try to be clear ... I love a challenge.

 

If your split level is at level x (x > 1),

 

... Any file or directory created at level x+1 (i.e., inside a level x directory) may be placed on ANY disk in the share. 

 

... Any file or directory created at level x+2 or greater, will be placed in the same disk as the x+1 level folder.

 

... Any file or directory created at any level < (x+1), i.e., between 2 and X (inclusive), unRAID will make a decision as to where to place the file or directory.  (In the case of directories, it may need to create the directory on MULTIPLE disks).

 

A new level 0 directory is a new disk.

 

A new level 1 directory is a new share.

 

Is there a way for a user share to have more than one split level.  What I mean by this is say I take different routes from the parent folder, one route takes me to level 5 another takes me to level 7.  I want a different split level for files/folders at level 5 than I do at level 7 even though they are still under the same parents.  Say for example I had a share folder for all my family vacation/events which consists of videos/dvds/music/etc...  I am assuming this is impossible right?

 

Right.  This is not possible.  To use split levels effectively, you really need a consistent structure for your data.

 

Also since we are taking about shares I had a question about SMB/NFS Export differences. ...

 

Will leave this to others to answer.  I have no experience or knowledge about using NFS on unRAID.

 

Share this post


Link to post

Is there a way for a user share to have more than one split level.  What I mean by this is say I take different routes from the parent folder, one route takes me to level 5 another takes me to level 7.  I want a different split level for files/folders at level 5 than I do at level 7 even though they are still under the same parents.  Say for example I had a share folder for all my family vacation/events which consists of videos/dvds/music/etc...  I am assuming this is impossible right?

 

Yes there is a way to do this.  A new feature was added in 4.4 that lets you 'tag' a directory to not be split.  Instead of specifying a number for the split level, you can specify a (non-numeric) string.  When a new object is created, if that string exists anywhere in the directory path of that object, then the object is created on the same disk as the object's directory.

 

Easy, right?

 

Let's say you want to set this up:

 

  Video                                [this is the user share]

    Movies

      Alien                              [don't split this directory]

      Braveheart                      [don't split this directory]

      Caddyshack                    [dont' split this directory]

    Videos

      Vacations

        Hawaii-2002                  [dont' split this directory]

        Mexico-2003                [dont' split this directory]

      Sports

          Softball

            Firecracker-2002        [dont' split this directory]

          Soccer

            Championship-2000    [dont' split this directory]

 

As you can see a single 'split level' will not do for this.  So what you do is decide on a character or a string to 'tag' the directories that you don't want to split.  Let's say we use the string "["  (ie, a single left-bracket).  We then rename to this:

 

  Video                                [this is the user share]

    Movies

      Alien [DVD]                      [don't split this directory]

      Braveheart [blu-ray]            [don't split this directory]

      Caddyshack [DVD]              [dont' split this directory]

    Videos

      Vacations

        Hawaii [2002]                  [dont' split this directory]

        Mexico [2003]                [dont' split this directory]

      Sports

          Softball

            Firecracker [2002]        [dont' split this directory]

          Soccer

            Championship [2000]    [dont' split this directory]

 

So let's say we just created the 'Caddyshack [DVD]' directory, and now we're about to create 'Caddyshack [DVD]/video_ts'.  When unRAID is about to crreate 'video_ts' it notices that split level for the share is set to "[", and it sees a "[" in the object's path, so it will create 'video_ts' on the same disk where it's parent directory exists, that is, whatever disk 'Caddyshack [DVD]' happens to be on.  Then say we're about to create 'Caddyshack [DVD]/video_ts/video_ts.bup'.  Well again unRAID notices there's a "[" character in the path, so it creates 'video_ts.bup' on the same disk where parent directory 'video_ts' exists, which will be the same disk that 'Caddyshack [DVD]' exists, hence entire 'Caddyshack [DVD]' directory contents will all be on the same disk.

 

Note that when 'Caddyshack [DVD]' itself was created, there was no "[" in the path, so disk to create 'Caddyshack [DVD]' directory will be decided by unRAID based on included/excluded disks and allocation method (highwater or most-free).

 

 

Anyway, bjp999 is right, the split level concept is hard to explain.  There are other ideas I'm exploring but always open to suggestion :)

 

Share this post


Link to post

This seems like a much better way to go for split levels.  And even easy to explain.  ;)

 

As I was thinking, setting the split level to "VIDEO_TS" for DVD rips might work well and not require wholesale renaming of directories.

 

Would that work?  Is it case sensitive?

Share this post


Link to post

This seems like a much better way to go for split levels.  And even easy to explain.  ;)

 

As I was thinking, setting the split level to "VIDEO_TS" for DVD rips might work well and not require wholesale renaming of directories.

 

Would that work?  Is it case sensitive?

 

Thought of that, but here's the problem.  Often you have other files underneath the title directory, such as folder.jpg (and apps like 'MyMovies' for Vista put other files in there, eg, some xml files and front & back cover art).  You really want all these files to be on same disk as 'video_ts'.  Granted, these are small files and chances are they will be on same disk, but possibility exists they won't.

 

Yes, comparison is case-sensitive.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Yes there is a way to do this.

;D Great!

 

So what you do is decide on a character or a string to 'tag' the directories that you don't want to split.  Let's say we use the string "["  (ie, a single left-bracket).

What are the character or strings can be used or does it just need to be consistent through the user share?  I already had some folders with [] in it so I guess I unknowingly already had those folders to be placed on the same disk even though that was not the intent of the folder.

 

To make it simple by this method I can just setup a user share to span say disk1,disk2,etc.. and set the split level to 0 (so I do not have to figure it out).  Then anytime I want something to stay in the same disk i can just use []'s.  Is this right?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
To make it simple by this method I can just setup a user share to span say disk1,disk2,etc.. and set the split level to 0 (so I do not have to figure it out).  Then anytime I want something to stay in the same disk i can just use []'s.  Is this right?

 

No, I believe that you would put [ into the Split Level setting, not 0.

 

I think it is great to have another tool for controlling splitting, and there are some users who will benefit from this one, but I can't help thinking that this method will have limited implementation, mostly because of the labor required in renaming perhaps thousands of DVD's, movies, and music pieces.  I wonder too if many of the various media center software will be able to work with it, as I would think (don't actually know) that they would want control of this kind of media data.  Titles may be sourced from IMDB or other similar DB.  And last, although Tom's example looks pretty good, I can see these otherwise clean titles being viewed in a media list, will look more cluttered, not as clean, with the added info.  In fairness, I expect that good batch renaming tools will be suggested, and some of the media center software may not have any issues with it, may even offer the tools for templating/renaming the titles.

 

I would like to offer a suggestion for a third method, very similar to the new method.  It too may suffer from some of the same issues, but to a much lesser extent in my thinking.  Use the same non-numeric string to indicate that the level immediately below this level is not to be split.  This way, you are editing the categories, which are user contributed info, and not the titles themselves.  Using a similar example as above:

 

  Video                                [this is the user share]

    [Movies]                [don't split any folders below this]

      Alien                              [don't split this directory]

      Braveheart                      [don't split this directory]

      Caddyshack                     [don't split this directory]

    Videos

      [Vacations]           [don't split any folders below this]

         Hawaii-2002                  [don't split this directory]

         Mexico-2003                 [don't split this directory]

      Sports

          [softball]          [don't split any folders below this]

             Firecracker-2002         [don't split this directory]

          [soccer]           [don't split any folders below this]

             Championship-2000     [don't split this directory]

 

Now you only have to edit the category names, and it looks cleaner to me.  It's also more intuitive, MUCH easier to explain!  (I don't know if this will be harder to program!)

Share this post


Link to post

To make it simple by this method I can just setup a user share to span say disk1,disk2,etc.. and set the split level to 0 (so I do not have to figure it out).  Then anytime I want something to stay in the same disk i can just use []'s.  Is this right?

 

No, I believe that you would put [ into the Split Level setting, not 0.

 

I think it is great to have another tool for controlling splitting, and there are some users who will benefit from this one, but I can't help thinking that this method will have limited implementation, mostly because of the labor required in renaming perhaps thousands of DVD's, movies, and music pieces.  I wonder too if many of the various media center software will be able to work with it, as I would think (don't actually know) that they would want control of this kind of media data.  Titles may be sourced from IMDB or other similar DB.  And last, although Tom's example looks pretty good, I can see these otherwise clean titles being viewed in a media list, will look more cluttered, not as clean, with the added info.  In fairness, I expect that good batch renaming tools will be suggested, and some of the media center software may not have any issues with it, may even offer the tools for templating/renaming the titles.

 

I would like to offer a suggestion for a third method, very similar to the new method.  It too may suffer from some of the same issues, but to a much lesser extent in my thinking.  Use the same non-numeric string to indicate that the level immediately below this level is not to be split.  This way, you are editing the categories, which are user contributed info, and not the titles themselves.  Using a similar example as above:

 

  Video                                [this is the user share]

    [Movies]                [don't split any folders below this]

      Alien                              [don't split this directory]

      Braveheart                      [don't split this directory]

      Caddyshack                     [don't split this directory]

    Videos

      [Vacations]           [don't split any folders below this]

         Hawaii-2002                  [don't split this directory]

         Mexico-2003                 [don't split this directory]

      Sports

          [softball]          [don't split any folders below this]

             Firecracker-2002         [don't split this directory]

          [soccer]           [don't split any folders below this]

             Championship-2000     [don't split this directory]

 

Now you only have to edit the category names, and it looks cleaner to me.  It's also more intuitive, MUCH easier to explain!  (I don't know if this will be harder to program!)

 

I like that idea!

 

In the mean time, splitting based on VIDEO_TS as I previously posted would (for now) give you a 98% solution.  Although there would be a small opportunity for some files to get split from the main movie folder (very small chance), it would keep all of the parts of the movie together and avoid the stuttering problem that people using user shares are seeking to remedy with split levels.

Share this post


Link to post
In the mean time, splitting based on VIDEO_TS as I previously posted would (for now) give you a 98% solution.  Although there would be a small opportunity for some files to get split from the main movie folder (very small chance), it would keep all of the parts of the movie together and avoid the stuttering problem that people using user shares are seeking to remedy with split levels.

 

That's true.  It does solve the stutter problem, plus it is the easiest to implement.  You have only one setting to change, nothing to rename, and it is already programmed, as method #2.  One quibble though, it does not completely solve the problem of avoiding unnecessary drive spin ups.  When browsing for a movie, you might have to spin one drive up for the folder.jpg, then another to play the movie, and conceivably another for a third little file (other metadata or subtitles?).

Share this post


Link to post

That's true.  It does solve the stutter problem, plus it is the easiest to implement.  You have only one setting to change, nothing to rename, and it is already programmed, as method #2. 

 

I like easy.

 

One quibble though, it does not completely solve the problem of avoiding unnecessary drive spin ups.  When browsing for a movie, you might have to spin one drive up for the folder.jpg, then another to play the movie, and conceivably another for a third little file (other metadata or subtitles?).

 

Legitimate quibble.  But likelihood of the few little files we're talking about (.jpg, .xml, etc.) getting separated from the mothership is quite low.

 

Also, a slight pause while browsing DVDs is not nearly so bad as a stutter in the middle of a movie.  If you are browsing your DVD collection and pictures are stored with the movies themselves, chances are all of the drives are going to spin up anyway.

 

Many users here are less worried about where files are placed (might prefer to not care at all), but just don't like stuttering.  For them this is a good solution IMO.  For everyone else that has the anal desire to make sure that all files associated with a movies stay on the same disk, write your movie files directly to disk shares and use the user shares only for reading.

Share this post


Link to post

I really like RobJ's idea...  I am just trying to figure out how I will lay out my data/user shares before I actually start the migration from RAID5 to UNRaid.

 

Essentially applying Split 2 factor to what ever matches the split criteria ([ in the case of Tom's example).  This allows for config of the 2 most common organization systems, 2 levels (most movies) and 3 levels (TV Shows, Music).

 

Another method to config this could be through hard coded/configed paths.  This may make it a bit easier for users to grasp, say:

 

Don't split contents of folders located in these paths:

 

\\tower\SHARE\movies\DVD\

\\tower\SHARE\movies\Home Video\

 

You could get fancy with RobJ's idea and add wildcards for Music/TV like this:

 

\\tower\SHARE\Music\*\

\\tower\SHARE\TV\*\

 

* indicates to split these folders no matter what the name is but keep their contents on the same disk.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

I really like RobJ's idea...  I am just trying to figure out how I will lay out my data/user shares before I actually start the migration from RAID5 to UNRaid.

 

Essentially applying Split 2 factor to what ever matches the split criteria ([ in the case of Tom's example).  This allows for config of the 2 most common organization systems, 2 levels (most movies) and 3 levels (TV Shows, Music).

 

Another method to config this could be through hard coded/configed paths.  This may make it a bit easier for users to grasp, say:

 

Don't split contents of folders located in these paths:

 

\\tower\SHARE\movies\DVD\

\\tower\SHARE\movies\Home Video\

 

You could get fancy with RobJ's idea and add wildcards for Music/TV like this:

 

\\tower\SHARE\Music\*\

\\tower\SHARE\TV\*\

 

* indicates to split these folders no matter what the name is but keep their contents on the same disk.

 

 

Yes, thought of doing this, actually letting you specify "regular expressions" to define which directory(ies) should not be split.  Problem with this approach is that it's not "simple" - you have to understand what's going on, and then create the proper expression (haha - as if "split-level" is easy to understand  :P

 

The ideal solution is something in the actual name of the directory (or in it's path) that indicates that the contents of this directory should not be split.  Hence the "[" character.  This requires no additional configuration to get it working.

 

Another idea I've played with is to have different "views".  Take our example:

 

Video                                [this is the user share]

    Movies

      Alien                              [don't split this directory]

      Braveheart                      [don't split this directory]

      Caddyshack                     [dont' split this directory]

    Videos

      Vacations

         Hawaii-2002                  [dont' split this directory]

         Mexico-2003                 [dont' split this directory]

      Sports

          Softball

             Firecracker-2002         [dont' split this directory]

          Soccer

             Championship-2000     [dont' split this directory]

 

What appears in My Network Places is the single "Video" share.  Suppose we introduce a configuration variable which, if set, enables "Media Mode View".  When enabled, you will see 2 shares under My Network Places:

 

Video

Video[]

 

Then when you explore the "Video[]" share you see the exact same directories and files you would see if you explore the "Video" share, except you now see the "don't split" tags:

 

Video[]                                [this is the user share]

    Movies

      Alien[no-split]                 [don't split this directory]

      Braveheart[no-split]         [don't split this directory]

      Caddyshack[no-split]        [dont' split this directory]

    Videos

      Vacations

         Hawaii-2002[no-split]    [dont' split this directory]

         Mexico-2003[no-split]    [dont' split this directory]

      Sports

          Softball

             Firecracker-2002[no-split]     [dont' split this directory]

          Soccer

             Championship-2000[no-split]    [dont' split this directory]

 

You can use Explorer to "rename" directories to add the tags, or specify them directly when you copy over a movie, ie, use the target "\\Tower\Videos[]\Vacations\Disneyland-2008[no-split]".

 

This can form the basis of a more generalized capability:

 

Video

    Movies

      Alien[no-split,genre=SciFi,year=1979,rating=R]

 

From this we can create:

 

Video

   Movies

      Genre

         SciFi

           Alien

      Year

         1979

            Alien

       Rating

          R

            Alien

 

Might be nice for those using streaming media players.

Share this post


Link to post

imo requiring people to rename their media folders aka Titles, albums, artists folders is not a good idea.  Some HTPC systems use the actual folder tnames to display media which could cause compromise by the user, proper file splitting or proper display name in HTPC etc.

 

The view idea seems to be a good solution to the problem above but adding complexity where I don't think its needed, when people ask questions... Are you talking about shares or views? etc etc etc.  Also users like myself not only use splitting for media but my other data as well like applications, personal files etc  It almost sounds like views are usershares for usershares...  confusing as well.

 

I think expressions aren't nearly as tough as you might think, most media users have used mp3 tagging tools, all of which use these expressions.  This could even be simplified, to the point of list the folders/paths you want split.

 

Or

 

performing a splitlevel 1 or 2 on a string would also be extremely flexible, as mentioned have the string indicate what should be split rather then what should NOT be then you avoid making users rename their media but rather rename their organization folders which is much simpler and easier to do.  The only downside is folder structures that a user may want a splitlevel of 3 (music\artist\album\track).  This would only be a downside if the splitlevel based on a string could not be configurable.

 

 

I will say I think the splitlevel/string idea is the core of what is needed, just that the UI of setting this is just a bit confusing and could be expanded.  The flexibility is there with the current system just a few features need to be added and another different UI to set it.

 

At least for me what made the splitlevel confusing at first was the inclusion of the sharename I was just creating.  If the splitlevel config # didn't include the root share folder it probably would have been easier for me to pick up.  But this is me, and how I think...  I created the share opened it up and was thinking splitlevel 2 means 2 directory level in the share rather then including the share.

 

I am also the type of user that doesn't want multiple shares, I want my data storage as simple as possible RAID5 like.  So I setup my whole storage share as a split level 2 to cover most of my organization types MOVIES\Title, APPS\Title etc etc.  While not what I prefer I can live with my splitlevel 3 data being split at level 2 instead.. (music\artist\album or TV\Title\Season).  It just would be nice to be able to do both level 2 and level 3 splits in the same share while NOT having to rename my media.

 

Share this post


Link to post

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.