Re: unRAID Server Release 6.0-beta12-x86_64 SPINDOWN/SPINUP ISSUES


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 208
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

As far as what fixed this, it could very well be the change we made in 14a to poll_spindown to not tie that event to checking disk attributes (SMART).

 

If this will be the case, then I will nostalgically think back to my post sometime beginning of Jan when I first suspected this to be the issue...  :P

Link to comment

Looking at the announcement thread of b14a I think the good news is that now we know the root cause of this will be something with 'poll_spindown' event.

 

This also makes sense historically: 'poll_spindown' event has been added between b11 and b12 and the issue popped up in b12.

 

What actually scrares me a bit is that Tom was not even mentioning this issue in the b14a announcment (I mean that there is a potential fix for this) which makes me feel the issue was/is not really on his radar so this was/is not taken seriously. Now it probably will because with 14a it has got proven that something is wrong.

 

Link to comment

The issue isn't solved in 14a, it's just hidden.  Tom made a post mentioning that the webGui isn't displaying the correct spin status right now in 14a.  We're working on a 14b which may correct that and be the fix for this issue altogether.

 

As far as this being on Tom's radar, it definitely has been and we've discussed it at length internally.  The problem has been and always has been consistently reproducing this in a lab.  Even yesterday after all my testing and going back and forth between different versions, I thought I had it all solved and then POOF, it starts happening again to me on 14a after the release.

 

When an issue is reported per the guidelines posted here, we can usually find it and fix it fairly quick because if posting under those guidelines, it will contain the exact steps to reproduce it.

 

When posts do not follow those guidelines or when the steps to reproduce don't work on our test systems, that's when issues like this can take longer to resolve and don't get mentioned in updates.  What I or Tom say in a reply on a thread when trying to troubleshoot and what should get stated in an official announcement post are two different things.  Hopefully this clarifies.

Link to comment

I hope you don't blame us not being able to report against those guidelines, because I think you are in the same shoes. We were/ are all trying to find a pattern and a clear way to reproduce, but I think by now we all know that the characteristic of the issue just doesn't allow this.

 

Also, I think the guys here were actually putting huge efforts in trying to locate and catch the issue.

You were also able to reproduce finally.

 

So all what I was just trying to articulate that after all the time, effort, willingness and testing made here, it would be good feeling to see the issue acknowledged and recognized in the announcment threads as well, especially when there is a potential for being resolved.  8)

Link to comment

I hope you don't blame us not being able to report against those guidelines, because I think you are in the same shoes. We were/ are all trying to find a pattern and a clear way to reproduce, but I think by now we all know that the characteristic of the issue just doesn't allow this.

 

Also, I think the guys here were actually putting huge efforts in trying to locate and catch the issue.

You were also able to reproduce finally.

 

So all what I was just trying to articulate that after all the time, effort, willingness and testing made here, it would be good feeling to see the issue acknowledged and recognized in the announcment threads as well, especially when there is a potential for being resolved.  8)

 

Why would you think I blame you guys?  Please take my post for face value.  There was no "slam" to the community on that at all.  The simple fact is without the guidelines being followed (or even when they are, if we can't recreate in our own test environments), the issue will take longer to track down and resolve.  Without testers like you guys, this stuff would take even longer and more bugs might slip through without the reporting.  We definitely appreciate it!

 

As far as acknowledging it in the announcement thread, if you notice, beta 14b is now available and the first note is regarding the fix for this issue.

Link to comment

Beta14b has fixed my spin down issues. I know this problem was difficult to find and I appreciate it. Thanks.

 

Gary

 

THANK YOU FOR CONFIRMING!  That's great to hear.  Hoping to see more people chime in so we can officially mark this thread as Solved.

I'm on 14b, have 5 WD drives and the spin down issue is resolved for me.  I did use idle3ctl when that was posted and that seemed to help then though.  But was under the impression the gui wasn't reporting correctly for one of those betas.  So I'm not sure if idle3ctrl really helped.

Link to comment

Beta14b has fixed my spin down issues. I know this problem was difficult to find and I appreciate it. Thanks.

 

Gary

 

THANK YOU FOR CONFIRMING!  That's great to hear.  Hoping to see more people chime in so we can officially mark this thread as Solved.

I'm on 14b, have 5 WD drives and the spin down issue is resolved for me.  I did use idle3ctl when that was posted and that seemed to help then though.  But was under the impression the gui wasn't reporting correctly for one of those betas.  So I'm not sure if idle3ctrl really helped.

Woo hoo!  Thanks Derek for confirming!!!

Link to comment

I'm also seeing drives shown as spun down when I expect them to be.  Presuming that the state is being reported correctly (and access delays would suggest that this is so), then all would seem to be well.

 

Only oddity - I have a drive which has been spun down for more than twelve hours, yet the drive temperature is still being reported.

 

I know that unMenu made a special case for WD drives, which don't have to be spun up in order to read the temperature, but I don't believe that unRAID/dynamix does this ... so where is this temperature coming from?

Link to comment

I'm also seeing drives shown as spun down when I expect them to be.  Presuming that the state is being reported correctly (and access delays would suggest that this is so), then all would seem to be well.

 

Only oddity - I have a drive which has been spun down for more than twelve hours, yet the drive temperature is still being reported.

 

I know that unMenu made a special case for WD drives, which don't have to be spun up in order to read the temperature, but I don't believe that unRAID/dynamix does this ... so where is this temperature coming from?

 

When I could not tell for sure whether a drive was spun-up or not, I watched the temperature.  If it is significant higher than ambient and/or changes (more than a change in the amibent would account for), you can be almost certain that it is spun-up.  Hope this helps...

 

 

Link to comment

Hi, issue not resolved here, some drive seems to be spin down but they are still reporting the temperature, and my sever woon't enter into S3 automatically. If needed I can provide my logs.

S3 is not supported by us just yet and not sure how that plugin may affect this. The temp reporting issue is fixed in next release. Your drives should spin down fine. Please remove plugins and test again for spin down.

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.