unRAID Server Release 6.0-beta14b-x86_64 Available

[Dephcon]

Does not happen to me. My Dockers are on the cache drive which is set to never spin down.

 

Docker page also loads instantly in my case.

 

Same here.

as per xamindar below: 

I have a mix of reiserfs, xfs and btfs for data drives and a btfs ssd cache drive set to not spindown.  My docker.img is on a cache only share.

[FLK]

I have the issue too. Was also wondering why the page was so long to load, and why all my disk were "up" sometimes

 

Maybe it's related to the used filesystem? I'm running btrfs on both array and cache, and my docker image is in /mnt/cache not in a "cache only" share.

[xamindar]

I have the issue too. Was also wondering why the page was so long to load, and why all my disk were "up" sometimes

 

Maybe it's related to the used filesystem? I'm running btrfs on both array and cache, and my docker image is in /mnt/cache not in a "cache only" share.

Lets try to narrow this issue down. My docker image is on "/mnt/cache/appdata/docker.img", the "appdata" share is set to cache only and is where my dockers store their config files.

 

All my disks in the array and the cache drive are formatted as btrfs.

[smashingtool]

So would most of you running this say it's stable enough to dive in from 5.0.5?

 

I am in need of replacing my 64GB SSD Cache drive and I kind of want to go ahead and jump to unRaid 6 at the same time so I can format my newer 128GB SSDwith BTRFS. I have a backup of all of my actual data.

 

 

 

 

[garycase]

So would most of you running this say it's stable enough to dive in from 5.0.5?

 

It is, of course, still a Beta ... so there's always some risk, but it's certainly true that the current Beta is very stable.  I think most of the remaining changes are outside of the actual NAS functions ... e.g. finalizing the VM Manager; improving Docker management; etc.   

 

In any event, you don't have any choice if you want to use BTRFS with your cache, so I'd go ahead and make the jump.

 

One important thing to remember is that UnRAID, or any other RAID, is not a substitute for backups.  You clearly recognize this, based on your comment:

I have a backup of all of my actual data.

 

This also mitigates any risk associated with moving to the Beta 

[smashingtool]

Thanks, I made the switch. Everything seems to have gone well, and the system definitely feels a bit snappier.

 

However, I lost the usage of one plugin, VFS_Recycle. The Samba recycle bin. Is there anything like it for v6? I have not found anything. Thanks

 

Also, I'm hoping the SNAP for v6 works much better than the one for v5, the v6 one caused me enormous problems.

[BRiT]

Thanks, I made the switch. Everything seems to have gone well, and the system definitely feels a bit snappier.

 

However, I lost the usage of one plugin, VFS_Recycle. The Samba recycle bin. Is there anything like it for v6? I have not found anything. Thanks

 

Also, I'm hoping the SNAP for v6 works much better than the one for v5, the v6 one caused me enormous problems.

 

You can manually do what the vfs recycle plugin does. I dont have the details right now, but essentially you just make a file on the /boot/config directory that samba is already set to pull in each time it starts.

[bkastner]

So, I can already guess what sort of response I am going to get, however...

 

Is there any update on a new build of 6.0? It's been almost 2 months since the last build, and while there seems to be a number of general questions/issues there haven't seemed to be that may specific to this beta (i.e. this forum has not had near the activity as previous betas).

 

Hopefully this is a good sign that things are stabilizing and we are getting close to a RC release.

[jonp]

So, I can already guess what sort of response I am going to get, however...

 

Is there any update on a new build of 6.0? It's been almost 2 months since the last build, and while there seems to be a number of general questions/issues there haven't seemed to be that may specific to this beta (i.e. this forum has not had near the activity as previous betas).

 

Hopefully this is a good sign that things are stabilizing and we are getting close to a RC release.

 

We are working on getting a beta15 out shortly that will include a number of critical fixes to btrfs, the rcu_sched stalls, and our final feature addition:  VM Manager.  We ran into a snag these past few weeks with a few bugs that held up the release.  We've worked through the majority of those bugs at this point and the few that remain will be published as "known issues."  None are cause for major concern.

 

Beta 15 will most likely be the last beta release before we move to RC phase, but obviously that will depend on the feedback from the next release.

 

We will also be changing how we do our roadmap and organize the forums, which will be other changes you should expect to see over the next few weeks as we ramp up to release.

[HellDiverUK]

I'm glad things are progressing jonp - I'm just about to rebuild my home server, and it's a toss-up between unRAID and OpenMediaVault.  OMV was winning the flip due to a lack of updates in unRAID.

 

I do like unRAID, it seems much happier to spin down it's drives compared to OMV, which is a massive bonus to me.

 

How are the Haswell throttling issues progressing?  The new box is a Haswell Xeon, and I'd like to see it idling at 800MHz as it should.

[jonp]

I'm glad things are progressing jonp - I'm just about to rebuild my home server, and it's a toss-up between unRAID and OpenMediaVault.  OMV was winning the flip due to a lack of updates in unRAID.

 

I do like unRAID, it seems much happier to spin down it's drives compared to OMV, which is a massive bonus to me.

 

How are the Haswell throttling issues progressing?  The new box is a Haswell Xeon, and I'd like to see it idling at 800MHz as it should.

 

No new updates on that.  It's a low-priority fix for us at this point and will not hold up the release of 6.0 (it doesn't cause system crashing and other processor models remain unaffected by this).  I'm fairly confident this will get resolved in due time, but just can't be certain on when.

[Ockingshay]

I'm glad things are progressing jonp - I'm just about to rebuild my home server, and it's a toss-up between unRAID and OpenMediaVault.  OMV was winning the flip due to a lack of updates in unRAID.

 

I do like unRAID, it seems much happier to spin down it's drives compared to OMV, which is a massive bonus to me.

 

How are the Haswell throttling issues progressing?  The new box is a Haswell Xeon, and I'd like to see it idling at 800MHz as it should.

 

No new updates on that.  It's a low-priority fix for us at this point and will not hold up the release of 6.0 (it doesn't cause system crashing and other processor models remain unaffected by this).  I'm fairly confident this will get resolved in due time, but just can't be certain on when.

 

I don't believe it is just haswell xeons as my CPU is currently:

 

CPU utilization	
0%
CPU speed	core 1 / 2	3163 MHz	3126 MHz
core 3 / 4	2999 MHz	3093 MHz

 

it is an Intel® Xeon® CPU E3-1220 V2 @ 3.10GHz

[jonp]

I'm glad things are progressing jonp - I'm just about to rebuild my home server, and it's a toss-up between unRAID and OpenMediaVault.  OMV was winning the flip due to a lack of updates in unRAID.

 

I do like unRAID, it seems much happier to spin down it's drives compared to OMV, which is a massive bonus to me.

 

How are the Haswell throttling issues progressing?  The new box is a Haswell Xeon, and I'd like to see it idling at 800MHz as it should.

 

No new updates on that.  It's a low-priority fix for us at this point and will not hold up the release of 6.0 (it doesn't cause system crashing and other processor models remain unaffected by this).  I'm fairly confident this will get resolved in due time, but just can't be certain on when.

 

I don't believe it is just haswell xeons as my CPU is currently:

 

CPU utilization	
0%
CPU speed	core 1 / 2	3163 MHz	3126 MHz
core 3 / 4	2999 MHz	3093 MHz

 

it is an Intel® Xeon® CPU E3-1220 V2 @ 3.10GHz

 

Xeon is still considered part of the Haswell chipset.  You have a haswell.

[Ockingshay]

Ok, interesting to know, thanks.

 

In light of that fact, I want this fixed immediately 

[jonp]

Ok, interesting to know, thanks.

 

In light of that fact, I want this fixed immediately 

 

All kidding aside, nothing's really "broken."  The issue in question isn't causing problems of any kind.  If this issue was causing actual problems, I can tell you it would be prioritized for resolution, but since it's just an oddity at this point that only affects one series of processors and doesn't seem to cause any real problems, it's on the back-burner for now.  There are way bigger fish to fry at this point.

[bonienl]

Ok, interesting to know, thanks.

 

In light of that fact, I want this fixed immediately 

 

All kidding aside, nothing's really "broken."  The issue in question isn't causing problems of any kind.  If this issue was causing actual problems, I can tell you it would be prioritized for resolution, but since it's just an oddity at this point that only affects one series of processors and doesn't seem to cause any real problems, it's on the back-burner for now.  There are way bigger fish to fry at this point.

 

And there is a workaround by disabling the Intel driver in syslinux.cfg

 

append intel_pstate=disable initrd=/bzroot

 

 

[Ockingshay]

that depends on how expensive your electricity is 

 

Thanks bonienl, i will give it a try.

[JonathanM]

that depends on how expensive your electricity is 

If the change in power usage even came close to the cost of a starbucks coffee every month I'd be extremely surprised.

[Ockingshay]

Hence the tongue in cheek...

[sparklyballs]

Ok, interesting to know, thanks.

 

In light of that fact, I want this fixed immediately 

 

All kidding aside, nothing's really "broken."  The issue in question isn't causing problems of any kind.  If this issue was causing actual problems, I can tell you it would be prioritized for resolution, but since it's just an oddity at this point that only affects one series of processors and doesn't seem to cause any real problems, it's on the back-burner for now.  There are way bigger fish to fry at this point.

 

And there is a workaround by disabling the Intel driver in syslinux.cfg

 

append intel_pstate=disable initrd=/bzroot

 

 

^^^ this works for my haswell xeon.

 

[bkastner]

So, I can already guess what sort of response I am going to get, however...

 

Is there any update on a new build of 6.0? It's been almost 2 months since the last build, and while there seems to be a number of general questions/issues there haven't seemed to be that may specific to this beta (i.e. this forum has not had near the activity as previous betas).

 

Hopefully this is a good sign that things are stabilizing and we are getting close to a RC release.

 

We are working on getting a beta15 out shortly that will include a number of critical fixes to btrfs, the rcu_sched stalls, and our final feature addition:  VM Manager.  We ran into a snag these past few weeks with a few bugs that held up the release.  We've worked through the majority of those bugs at this point and the few that remain will be published as "known issues."  None are cause for major concern.

 

Beta 15 will most likely be the last beta release before we move to RC phase, but obviously that will depend on the feedback from the next release.

 

We will also be changing how we do our roadmap and organize the forums, which will be other changes you should expect to see over the next few weeks as we ramp up to release.

 

Thanks for the prompt update Jonp. I still think it would be nice to be able to get these updates without prompting, I do appreciate you at least taking the time to let know what's going on.

[smashingtool]

Thanks, I made the switch. Everything seems to have gone well, and the system definitely feels a bit snappier.

 

However, I lost the usage of one plugin, VFS_Recycle. The Samba recycle bin. Is there anything like it for v6? I have not found anything. Thanks

 

Also, I'm hoping the SNAP for v6 works much better than the one for v5, the v6 one caused me enormous problems.

 

You can manually do what the vfs recycle plugin does. I dont have the details right now, but essentially you just make a file on the /boot/config directory that samba is already set to pull in each time it starts.

 

Hmm, If you find that info, I would appreciate it. I havent found it by searching yet.

[HellDiverUK]

 

it is an Intel® Xeon® CPU E3-1220 V2 @ 3.10GHz

 

Xeon is still considered part of the Haswell chipset.  You have a haswell.

 

He has a V2, which is Ivy Bridge.  It's the V3 that's Haswell.

 

I've cancelled the order for the Haswell box for various reasons and I've decided to recycle my old Ivy Bridge i5 workstation (i5-3570S on an Asrock C216 WS)  It's throttling OK.

[trurl]

Thanks, I made the switch. Everything seems to have gone well, and the system definitely feels a bit snappier.

 

However, I lost the usage of one plugin, VFS_Recycle. The Samba recycle bin. Is there anything like it for v6? I have not found anything. Thanks

 

Also, I'm hoping the SNAP for v6 works much better than the one for v5, the v6 one caused me enormous problems.

 

You can manually do what the vfs recycle plugin does. I dont have the details right now, but essentially you just make a file on the /boot/config directory that samba is already set to pull in each time it starts.

 

Hmm, If you find that info, I would appreciate it. I havent found it by searching yet.

Samba Recycle Bin with VFS_Recycle

[Ockingshay]

 

it is an Intel® Xeon® CPU E3-1220 V2 @ 3.10GHz

 

Xeon is still considered part of the Haswell chipset.  You have a haswell.

 

He has a V2, which is Ivy Bridge.  It's the V3 that's Haswell.

 

I've cancelled the order for the Haswell box for various reasons and I've decided to recycle my old Ivy Bridge i5 workstation (i5-3570S on an Asrock C216 WS)  It's throttling OK.

 

Yes, just googled a bit deeper and it is indeed an ivy bridge chipset.