I have a share that only includes 1 disk and the excluded disk field is empty.

Unraid 6.1.9 is storing files on that share onto any disk it feels like (at least disk1, 2, 3 and 4 out of 9 disks) - disk 7 was the only included disk on the share.

The Alolocation method on the share was "Fill-up", but split level was set to as-required.

 

I've now excluded explictly the other disk - that seems to have solved it for now, but not the behavior I expected.

Definitely not the behavior I'd have expected.  This may have been some interaction between the Global share settings and the specific settings for the share.    Can you detail exactly what those were?

 

Global share settings were =

 

Included "all", Excluded "Disk 9" (the 2 enables were both true).

 

I changed the share settings to explicity exclude disk 1-6,8, and split level to Manual, but that didn't change the behavior.

 

I did make sure there were no "Backup" (that was the share name) folder on any disk except 7 when I started.

 

I've since rebooted, and I'll see if it happens again (it's happening from python doing an shutil.move of a file from one share to the Backup share).

 

Aha - as I say it, I wonder if something somewhere is creating the share on the same disk where the file was originally created, to make the

move fast?

 

 

Yep - that's exactly the behavior - shutil.move is just moving the file into a Backups folder on the same disk -

basically - I'm using python to run par2 on a file on a share - the file happens to be on disk2.  I then move the par2 file to the Backups share via shutil.move.

 

It ends up creating a backup share on disk2.... 

Do NOT have include and exclude both set. Set one or the other but not both.

Do NOT have include and exclude both set. Set one or the other but not both.

 

Agree -- you don't need to set both; and while there ARE rules defined for the interaction, it's unnecessary -- and not good practice -- to use both.

 

Do NOT have include and exclude both set. Set one or the other but not both.

 

Agree -- you don't need to set both; and while there ARE rules defined for the interaction, it's unnecessary -- and not good practice -- to use both.

Part of the problem here (and is no fault of the OP's) is that the operation of dynamix webUI has changed relatively recently (not quite sure)

 

When not explicitly including a disk, dynamix will say "ALL" even when an exclusion is set.  So, contrary to everyone else's advice, quinnmjcj is doing it correctly