Hard linking does not work.

[Garani]

Hi all.

 

Seems that hard linking is not supported by unRAID. Is this a feature that will be added/worked on, or not?

 

root@Tower:/mnt/user/mailbox/testmbox# ln tmp/foo new/foo 
ln: failed to create hard link ‘new/foo’ => ‘tmp/foo’: Function not implemented

[JonathanM]

Hi all.

 

Seems that hard linking is not supported by unRAID. Is this a feature that will be added/worked on, or not?

 

root@Tower:/mnt/user/mailbox/testmbox# ln tmp/foo new/foo 
ln: failed to create hard link ‘new/foo’ => ‘tmp/foo’: Function not implemented

I could be wrong, but I think it's the FUSE user file system that is the issue. Try using the /mnt/disk?/mailbox instead of the user path and see if that works.

[Garani]

I could be wrong, but I think it's the FUSE user file system that is the issue. Try using the /mnt/disk?/mailbox instead of the user path and see if that works.

 

You are actually right.. I have read up just a minute ago that it is an issue with fuse.shfs.

 

But if I were to export /mnt/diskX/mailbox, wouldn't that mangle the parity drive? I have no problem in forcing a low level export and to keep stuff all on a drive, but I want to retain the parity safeguard.

[JonathanM]

I could be wrong, but I think it's the FUSE user file system that is the issue. Try using the /mnt/disk?/mailbox instead of the user path and see if that works.

 

You are actually right.. I have read up just a minute ago that it is an issue with fuse.shfs.

 

But if I were to export /mnt/diskX/mailbox, wouldn't that mangle the parity drive? I have no problem in forcing a low level export and to keep stuff all on a drive, but I want to retain the parity safeguard.

Nope. Everything under /mnt/disk? is parity protected. It's manipulating the /dev/sd?1 partitions of array members that will cause issues with parity.

 

It's perfectly acceptable and even preferred by some to use the /mnt/disk?/share to manage the content, and use the /mnt/user/share structure to consume the content. All my disk shares are hidden RW, but my user shares are mostly R only for connected media devices.

[Garani]

Nope. Everything under /mnt/disk? is parity protected. It's manipulating the /dev/sd?1 partitions of array members that will cause issues with parity.

 

It's perfectly acceptable and even preferred by some to use the /mnt/disk?/share to manage the content, and use the /mnt/user/share structure to consume the content. All my disk shares are hidden RW, but my user shares are mostly R only for connected media devices.

 

So this is the famous "disk export" that I kept reading abut and couldn't quite understand what and were it was.

 

Well, this changes a lot, I could share a raw disk with my virtual machine in 9p and have al mailboxes there... this is and eye opener!

[JonathanM]

Nope. Everything under /mnt/disk? is parity protected. It's manipulating the /dev/sd?1 partitions of array members that will cause issues with parity.

 

It's perfectly acceptable and even preferred by some to use the /mnt/disk?/share to manage the content, and use the /mnt/user/share structure to consume the content. All my disk shares are hidden RW, but my user shares are mostly R only for connected media devices.

 

So this is the famous "disk export" that I kept reading abut and couldn't quite understand what and were it was.

 

Well, this changes a lot, I could share a raw disk with my virtual machine in 9p and have al mailboxes there... this is and eye opener!

Be careful with your wording. You are not sharing a "raw disk" which would be /dev/sd?. You are sharing a mounted partition with the format and permissions managed by unraid. Any root level folders you create on it WILL start participating in the user shares, so be careful with paths when you create new folders on the /mnt/disk?/ level.

[Garani]

Indeed! Thank you for the heads up.

 

Tomorrow I'll test things out.