These all came to me while staring at yet another parity check and while I feel confident I'm going to feel silly having asked them, I'm willing to risk it. I did try to find answers on my own, but alas.

 

• What happens if your two year old pulls the jump drive after server is up and array is humming along? Other than a serious, stern and ignored talking to...
  
• Can you write to a user share while a parity check is happening? Should you?
  
• On a similar note, can you make changes to the settings (create/edit/delete user shares, eg) while running parity check is underway?
  
• What's the reasoning behind include/exclude disk via User Shares? What circumstances would either of these be helpful?
  
• Why do the separate disks show up under LAN view, in addition to the User Shares? (disk1, disk2, flash) Is there any good reason to access a disk directly instead of a share? Can you hide the actual disks from view (Pro or non-Pro)?
  
• How do you enable Users/User level security? SOLVED: buy the Pro version!
  
• No daylight savings time in Settings/Date and time?
  

 

I also wanted to thank everyone who's been kind enough to answer previous (and, I'm sure, future) questions here on the forum. It is sincerely appreciated.

These all came to me while staring at yet another parity check and while I feel confident I'm going to feel silly having asked them, I'm willing to risk it. I did try to find answers on my own, but alas.
 

• What happens if your two year old pulls the jump drive after server is up and array is humming along? Other than a serious, stern and ignored talking to...
  

If you can reason with a 2 year old, you are a better person than most.  I advise waiting 8 or 10 years before trying to reason with them.  Don't wait any longer though, as I'm not sure anybody can reason with a 13 year old.

 

In any case, the flash drive is written to when any configuration changes are made and when the array is started or stopped.  You will not be able to cleanly stop the array if the flash drive is un-plugged.  (You will be forced to perform a full parity check if you do not cleanly stop the array.)

 

If you plug the flash drive back in, it should be recognized and be fine.

• Can you write to a user share while a parity check is happening? Should you?
  

Yes.  Completely up to you.  You can write to the array at any time the array is on-line.   Obviously, you cannot write to the array if it is stopped, or powered down.

• 
   
  
• On a similar note, can you make changes to the settings (create/edit/delete user shares, eg) while running parity check is underway?
  

Yes

• What's the reasoning behind include/exclude disk via User Shares? What circumstances would either of these be helpful?
  

When you want to force your data for that specific share to stay on (or off of) specific disks.

• Why do the separate disks show up under LAN view, in addition to the User Shares? (disk1, disk2, flash)
  

You can hide the disk shares from view.  On the "Shares" management page in the web-interface, just set "Disk Shares (SMB) to hidden or read/write hidden. 

• Is there any good reason to access a disk directly instead of a share?
  

Yes, you can control where you store the data to group files logically and minimize the drives spun up when accessing a specific folder. Also, it is a tiny bit faster., although the network throughput will probably not let you see any appreciable difference.

• Can you hide the actual disks from view (Pro or non-Pro)?
  

Already answered... set them to hidden at the top of the "Shares" config page in the web-interface

• No daylight savings time in Settings/Date and time?
  

Download and install the "custom" time-zone file to your flash drive.  Then select "custom" on the settings page.  It will take care of the daylight-savings time changes for you.  The directions are here in the unRAID manual:

http://lime-technology.com/wiki/index.php/UnRAID_Manual#Time_zone

I noticed the link to the "timezones" directory is out of date on that page.  It is here:

http://download.lime-technology.com/

I also wanted to thank everyone who's been kind enough to answer previous (and, I'm sure, future) questions here on the forum. It is sincerely appreciated.

You are welcome.

 

Joe L.

Thanks Joe!

 

As far as the timezone goes, the download link on the page you linked is 404. I can't find a way to get to it via the main page, either. Any idea where it might live these days?

 

EDIT: I've answered my own question again. Yay me. Download page and specifically the timezone... err, nevermind. That is the same path as the one referenced in the article. So, not answered!

EDIT AGAIN: In case you missed Joe's edit above, here's the download link you should actually use: Downloads

 

Do you have a real world example of using exclude/include disks? I'm failing to see any reason to even stick that into my decision tree.

Thanks Joe!

 

As far as the timezone goes, the download link on the page you linked is 404. I can't find a way to get to it via the main page, either. Any idea where it might live these days?

 

Do you have a real world example of using exclude/include disks? I'm failing to see any reason to even stick that into my decision tree.

I noticed it too. I cannot fix the broken link, but the timezone folder is in the same "Downloads" folder as the unRAID releases.  I supplied a update to my previous post.

 

As far as includes/excludes... I don't use them either, but then I usually write directly to the (shared, but hidden) disk shares when adding files.

 

Let's say you have an older, smaller disk you use for your financial records... You can create/name a "finance" share and include just that disk, and exclude that disk from all the other user-shares holding your movies,music, and photos. .  None of your music, photos, or movies would ever be copied to that smaller physical disk you are logically dedicating to your "financial records", and it would not need to spin up when browsing your media collection.

 

In the same way, when you go to do your banking, only the one disk will need to spin up, since all your records are in one physical disk.

 

Joe L.

Thanks Joe!

 

As far as the timezone goes, the download link on the page you linked is 404. I can't find a way to get to it via the main page, either. Any idea where it might live these days?

 

EDIT: I've answered my own question again. Yay me. Download page and specifically the timezone... err, nevermind. That is the same path as the one referenced in the article. So, not answered!

EDIT AGAIN: In case you missed Joe's edit above, here's the download link you should actually use: Downloads

 

Do you have a real world example of using exclude/include disks? I'm failing to see any reason to even stick that into my decision tree.

 

Simple example, you have a share called music, you have 3 data drives in your array... you want music to be contained on disk1 and disk2 only, you are saving disk three for pictures.

 

This is accomplished on of three ways... 1  Include disk1 and disk2 for the share.  now music will only allowed to be written to the two drives via user shares.  2 exclude disk 3, which tells unRAID not to use disk3 for the music share.  3 write the file directly to the disk share.

 

Why would someone want to avoid using certain disks in shares?  lots of reasons... they may have a particular structure to their data they want to maintain.  Or one disk may be a small old ide disk that they only want to use for pictures or selective document backup and don't want other shares poluting the drive and they don't want the picture/other shares spanning to the other disks.

 

Cheers,

Matt

Thanks Joe!

 

As far as the timezone goes, the download link on the page you linked is 404. I can't find a way to get to it via the main page, either. Any idea where it might live these days?

 

EDIT: I've answered my own question again. Yay me. Download page and specifically the timezone... err, nevermind. That is the same path as the one referenced in the article. So, not answered!

 

Do you have a real world example of using exclude/include disks? I'm failing to see any reason to even stick that into my decision tree.

 

I use the include/exclude disks for writing to my array.  I like to "know" where my information is and on what disk it is on.  I also write to my disks in a certain order.

Example: my DVD's user share is currently spanning three disks.  I first filled up disk2 (500GB), then disk3 (500GB) and have now started on disk4.  I do it that way so that I know what disk the movie information is going onto and how much free space there is on each.  I reserve one drive (disk1) for my torrent downloads, TV show rips from DVD, and my personal data.  This control allows me to control which disks spin up and how many are spun up.  If I let unRAID fill up whatever disk it wanted to with my DVD I could have DVD's on disk1, disk5, or disk6 also; which I do not want.

I was going to say that Joe's example just seemed like setting a split level the hard way, but Biggy2872's point of not stashing types of media on slower drives makes more sense to me. I still don't see myself using it, but it's nice to know it exists. Thanks!

 

Actually, just thought of something while contemplating changing my shares so that my Movies share excluded the IDE drive I have. If you change the settings, am I correct in assuming unRAID automagically moves Movies off the IDE drive? Or do I need to manually move the directory to another drive after changing the setting?

I use the include/exclude disks for writing to my array.  I like to "know" where my information is and on what disk it is on.  I also write to my disks in a certain order.

Example: my DVD's user share is currently spanning three disks.  I first filled up disk2 (500GB), then disk3 (500GB) and have now started on disk4.  I do it that way so that I know what disk the movie information is going onto and how much free space there is on each.  I reserve one drive (disk1) for my torrent downloads, TV show rips from DVD, and my personal data.  This control allows me to control which disks spin up and how many are spun up.  If I let unRAID fill up whatever disk it wanted to with my DVD I could have DVD's on disk1, disk5, or disk6 also; which I do not want.

 

I see why that's handy for you, but my own view of unRAID makes it seem like *not* knowing where the files are is an advantage. I'm pretty anal about file structure, but letting unRAID deal with it was a selling point for me. Is the disk spinning up a big enough deal to worry about that? It's obviously not a huge deal to implement, but it's One More Thing... and I'd like to lighten the load as much as possible.

 

Thanks for the example!

If you change the settings, am I correct in assuming unRAID automagically moves Movies off the IDE drive? Or do I need to manually move the directory to another drive after changing the setting?

You are incorrect. No automagic exists. 

 

unRAID never moves the data once it is on the disks in the protected array.  The only time unRAID moves data fro one disks to another is when you first write it to the "cache" drive.  (The cache drive is not in the protected array)

 

If you change your storage settings for shares, you need to move any pre-existing data yourself to the physical disks you desire.  As you said, it is a manual process.

Is the disk spinning up a big enough deal to worry about that?

Thanks for the example!

 

No it is not really that big of a deal.  But if I can spin up less disks when looking for all of my DVD's then that is a plus to me.  It is all really just personal preference.

Is the disk spinning up a big enough deal to worry about that?

Thanks for the example!

 

No it is not really that big of a deal.  But if I can spin up less disks when looking for all of my DVD's then that is a plus to me.  It is all really just personal preference.

I agree...

When you go to look at a movie listing on your media player, and everything is spun down, each disk that is part of the "Movies" user-share (or whatever you name it) must spin up in-turn before it can be read.  If each takes 5 seconds, and you have 10 disks, you will not see the movies listed for about 50 seconds or more (assuming your media player waits that long before timing out)

 

Keeping your movies/music/photos organized on fewer physical disks is a huge advantage when everything idle and needs to be spun up.  In my example, my photos might all be on one or two disks, and only those two would need to spin up if I were to look for a photos.  The directory list of photos might only take 10 seconds to return instead of 50.

 

Joe L.

Few more things have occurred to me.

 

Can you keep a single drive spun up all the time or better still, schedule a drive to spin up and stay spun? If the delay is on the order of five seconds per drive, then

 

Actually, I just thought of a reason to include/exclude drives. My two boys have music pumped to their room for naps (God help me: xylophone covers of U2, Coldplay, AC/DC, Led Zepplin, etc.) and that just stays on all the time rather than try to schedule something through Control4. If those songs were spread over drives, the drives would stay spun up 24/7. Forcing all on one drive would limit the wear and tear to one drive, at least.

Few more things have occurred to me.

 

Can you keep a single drive spun up all the time or better still, schedule a drive to spin up and stay spun? If the delay is on the order of five seconds per drive, then

 

Actually, I just thought of a reason to include/exclude drives. My two boys have music pumped to their room for naps (God help me: xylophone covers of U2, Coldplay, AC/DC, Led Zepplin, etc.) and that just stays on all the time rather than try to schedule something through Control4. If those songs were spread over drives, the drives would stay spun up 24/7. Forcing all on one drive would limit the wear and tear to one drive, at least.

 

Yes, you can set a certain disk to never spin down.  Just click on the disk name on the main unRAID web page and you can set it to "Never." Also, if a disk is being accessed it will obviously not spin down.  My parity and disk 1 never spin down (or very rarely) since I have rtorrent using disk1.

This deals with the Shares being exported, so decided to stick it in it's own post. I'm having trouble getting the effect I'd like, so here's what I want to have happen.

 

I'd like the flash, disk1, disk2, etc to not show up under My Network Places (I'd like to allow it for certain users, but that will wait for pro license). As suggested by Joe L., I went to Shares/Export settings and set "Flash share" and "Disk shares (SMB)" to "Export read/write, hidden". I stopped the array, and restarted the box. Unfortunately, I still see disk1 under My Network Places.

 

Help?

This deals with the Shares being exported, so decided to stick it in it's own post. I'm having trouble getting the effect I'd like, so here's what I want to have happen.

 

I'd like the flash, disk1, disk2, etc to not show up under My Network Places (I'd like to allow it for certain users, but that will wait for pro license). As suggested by Joe L., I went to Shares/Export settings and set "Flash share" and "Disk shares (SMB)" to "Export read/write, hidden". I stopped the array, and restarted the box. Unfortunately, I still see disk1 under My Network Places.

 

Help?

Your PC is probably trying to help you... by remembering the network shares it once found.

(or you have a top level folder on one of your  unRAID disks named "disk1" which in turn created a user-share named "disk1")

 

As far as spin-up time...  It varies from disk to disk.  Larger, and faster disks have more platters, and more mass, and need to get spun up to a higher speed  before becoming available.  It could easily be 10 seconds or more.  Smaller disks with less mass are easier to get spinning.  They can be quicker.

Green drives use smaller, less powerful motors, they may take longer to get a set of platters spinning at 7200 RPM than one that is less "green" and uses more power. (I'm just guessing.. but it seems reasonable to me) 

 

In any case, most of the time, I doubt if the time it takes to spin up a specific drive will be foremost in your purchasing decision.  (For me, at least, cost is foremost, as I tend to buy mine one at a a time when I can catch a good sale) 

Green drives use smaller, less powerful motors, they may take longer to get a set of platters spinning at 7200 RPM than one that is less "green" and uses more power.

 

Small correction.  Green drives spin at 5400 RPM, and they don't have a smaller motor, they have a surge limiter that reduces the surge current.  They have very high areal density and thus have fewer platters than most drives, on a platters/GB basis.... which means less mass to spin up.

Green drives use smaller, less powerful motors, they may take longer to get a set of platters spinning at 7200 RPM than one that is less "green" and uses more power.

 

Small correction.  Green drives spin at 5400 RPM, and they don't have a smaller motor, they have a surge limiter that reduces the surge current.  They have very high areal density and thus have fewer platters than most drives, on a platters/GB basis.... which means less mass to spin up.

 

Quick note on RPM and performance.  The transfer rate of a drive has to do with the number of bits per second that pass under the drive head.  If you have two identical disks, and spin one at 5400RPM and the other at 7200RPM, the 7200RPM drive will definitely be faster.  But if the 5400 RPM disk has a higher areal density, it can transfer data just as fast - even faster potentially.  The GP drives were "a generation ahead" in terms of areal density than its competitors, "making up" for some of the performance lost in slower rotation.  (Random access / seek time will always be slower with a slower spinning drive).  Now, some 7200 RPM drives have both the higher density + the faster speed (e.g., the Seagate 1.5T), making them perform very well especially as parity drives.  But if you compare a 7200RPM 500G drive with a 5400RPM 1T GP drive, you might actually find the GP drive performs better.

 

I use a bunch of these GP drives and have been very satisfied.  They are fast enough that they are not the bottleneck (the gigabit LAN is the bottleneck), require less power, run cooler, report their drive temps even when spun down (a small but appreciated feature), and have not required any firmware updates .

OMG bjp999 and I agree 

Sorry I opened up the can of worms regarding "green" vs drive more speed vs. powerful drive motors.  Obviously a lot of factors are involved, but to my simple mind, to draw less power, you must either be way more efficient, or do less work, or the same work over a longer period of time.

 

I know some drives are usable after a few seconds, and I know others take 10 or more.  it has nothing to do with how many bits go past the read head once the drive is usable.  That is bit-density vs. number of heads and platters.  Those determine total capacity.  As far as the "green" goes, it could be they just waste less energy as heat...

 

So... you are both right, but so am I.  A motor that is "surge" limited is less powerful than once that is not limited. (It takes very little power to keep a drive spinning once it is up to speed)

 

It's a floor wax ... and a desert topping...  everything physical and moving helps to determine the time it takes for a drive to become available and spin up from a sleeping state.

Ive long since given up trying to research HDD to that level of detail. I now buy WD green at the best price i can find and thats it. If your worried about that kind of detail to make things go faster then IMO unRAID isnt for you anyway. Its never been about speed.

Ive long since given up trying to research HDD to that level of detail. I now buy WD green at the best price i can find and thats it. If your worried about that kind of detail to make things go faster then IMO unRAID isnt for you anyway. Its never been about speed.

 

OMG, I agree with that too.    ;D

If your worried about that kind of detail to make things go faster then IMO unRAID isnt for you anyway. Its never been about speed.

 

I'm not *that* concerned, except to note that spinning up a drive is non-trivial. I expect WDGreens will work just fine. They'd better... they're in the mail large brown vehicle.

 

OMG, I agree with that too.    ;D

 

I'm bringing people together today! And no one's cursing me in the process! Yay!

 

The one drive I recommend using a Seagate 1.5TB drive on is the parity drive if you have multiple users and multiple simultaneous writes.

I saw a big change in system response after I switched my parity from a WD green 1TB to a Seagate 7200RPM 32MB cache 1.5TB drive.

I'm also using the Seagate 1.5 terabyte drive for a parity drive & have been happy with the performance. I haven't had any problems with the drives with the newer firmware.