Option to for user shares to be created ONLY manually

[bubbaQ]

I only have 2 users shares.... but unRAID insists on automatically creating a lot more, just because I have a directory in the root of a drive.

 

Would be nice to have an option to not create user shares automatically, but rather only manually.  Failing that, at least an option to default to NOT exporting them so they don't show up publicly.

[jonp]

Hmm, can you further elaborate on the folders you've created and why they need to exist in the location we auto detect for share names?  I'm interested in trying to better understand how widespread this issue may be as well as if there are alternative workarounds to solving this issue.

[bubbaQ]

Doesn't everyone use subdirectories?  Don't tell me you expect everyone to dump thousands of files in the root directories of the disks.

 

I use disk shares for 99% of my files.  I only have 2 user shares for materials that span multiple disks that do not need high-speed access.  Everything else resides on a disk share because it is not big enough to need to span multiple disks, and I need faster access (i have 10GBE dedicated connection).    I make many directories off the root of disk shares, and don't want them to be user shares.

 

The only alternatives are 1) use "." as leading character (and some Windoze software won't take it... even Windoze itself has issues with that) or 2) create a "fake" placeholder directory in the root of each disk and put everything under that.

[bubbaQ]

Another half-solution is to add an option for global share settings to default all new users shares to export=no.

[WeeboTech]

I've been bitten by this too. I don't always want every folder in the root of a directory to be exposed as a user share.

It was worse in the past when I created special catalog files in the root of every disk for my own housekeeping.

At least now it's contained to directories.

Still it forces me have to move directories into an organizational structure that I may not want.

 

I predominantly work on disk shares and only use user shares to consolidate disk shares when they do not fit on a disk.

I.E. readonly most of the time.

 

An option for:  automatic user shares or manual only is a good idea.

[foo_fighter]

I third this. Sometimes I create seemingly random directories in the root of my apps disk, like prime95 or have multiple backup versions of applications. I do not really want these exported. There's basically only 1 or 2 shares I need exported.

[itimpi]

I actually LIKE the current behaviour!  It makes it very easy if one does a 'new config' or something like that to have the shares magically re-appear.

 

I do not see why you could not create a top level folder "not_really_a-share' (or something equivalent) and then have everything else as a sub-folder off that.  This could be combined with a option in the share configuration level to not expose this pseudo-share via Samba if one did not want it to be network accessible,

[jonp]

Thanks for the additional information on this subject. Seems to make sense where the request is coming from and how it could help folks.  The team will review this for consideration in a future release.

[SSD]

I have also grappled with this.

 

Question through - by omitting certain disks from participating in user shares, can the same thing be accomplished? I have not tried it but in theory directories created on disks that are not available for user shares should not create user shares.

[WeeboTech]

I have also grappled with this.

 

Question through - by omitting certain disks from participating in user shares, can the same thing be accomplished? I have not tried it but in theory directories created on disks that are not available for user shares should not create user shares.

 

 

I don't know if this is a long standing bug or odd behavior. I remember once setting specific includes, but having a matching directory on another disk.

The directory on the 'other' disk became part of the user share because the name matched.

[SSD]

I have also grappled with this.

 

Question through - by omitting certain disks from participating in user shares, can the same thing be accomplished? I have not tried it but in theory directories created on disks that are not available for user shares should not create user shares.

 

 

I don't know if this is a long standing bug or odd behavior. I remember once setting specific includes, but having a matching directory on another disk.

The directory on the 'other' disk became part of the user share because the name matched.

 

I know what you say is true if you configure excluded disks for the specific user share. But, with the array stopped, you can set "global" settings and define which disks participate in user shares vs those that don't. What happens if you exclude the disk there? (My array is running a long batch process otherwise I could test it myself).

[WeeboTech]

I have also grappled with this.

 

Question through - by omitting certain disks from participating in user shares, can the same thing be accomplished? I have not tried it but in theory directories created on disks that are not available for user shares should not create user shares.

 

I don't know if this is a long standing bug or odd behavior. I remember once setting specific includes, but having a matching directory on another disk.

The directory on the 'other' disk became part of the user share because the name matched.

 

I know what you say is true if you configure excluded disks for the specific user share. But, with the array stopped, you can set "global" settings and define which disks participate in user shares vs those that don't. What happens if you exclude the disk there? (My array is running a long batch process otherwise I could test it myself).

 

 

I would have to test this again. It's been years, My arrays are highly active now too. I'll have to test at a low volume time or make another vmware instance. I'm testing all sorts of badblocks surface prepare/preclear tools and finally pulling data off the server drives that were underwater.

[PeterB]

I've requested this change before ... As soon as V5 implemented the facility to create user shares from the web ui, it seemed, to me, to be perverse that unRAID automatically turned every top-level directory into a user share.  Please allow us the option, at least, to prevent this automatic share creation.

 

A user share should only be created for each .cfg file in /boot/config/shares/, and these files should only exist where the user has specified the share through the UI.

 

One of the long-standing users argued, saying that unRAID was designed to create shares automatically, and that is the way it must stay ... I just shrugged my shoulders and forgot the issue.

[WeeboTech]

IOne of the long-standing users argued, saying that unRAID was designed to create shares automatically, and that is the way it must stay ...

 

I don't really care if this were the default behavior.

It can stay as it is for default.

I would like an option to turn it off.

[PeterB]

I would like an option to turn it off.

 

Indeed!

[bubbaQ]

IOne of the long-standing users argued, saying that unRAID was designed to create shares automatically, and that is the way it must stay ...

 

I don't really care if this were the default behavior.

It can stay as it is for default.

I would like an option to turn it off.

 

Absolutely.