Hi,

I have just followed the instructions at https://lime-technology.com/wiki/index.php/Replace_A_Cache_Drive to replace both of my Cache drives. I'm running unRAID 6.3.2 Basic.

After following the instructions, I clicked on the first cache drive on the Main page and ran the "Balance" command. I'm left wondering if both cache drives are properly formatted BTRFS and in a pool together?

Here is a screenshot of the Main page:

 

And from the first Cache drive settings page:

 

And from Cache 2 drive's settings page:

 

It looks to me like the first Cache drive is working but the second has not yet been formatted and joined to the pool? How should I fix this? Or is this the expected behavior?

Thank you,

Ari

It's a slightly confusing way of displaying it but it is expected behaviour.

Thank you for the reply. I'm not quite sure how to interpret it? How should I understand both:

>> It's a slightly confusing way of displaying it

and

>> it is expected behaviour.

 

Should I have included different screenshots or a log file? Or is the confusion from what the unRAID interface is displaying?

Whichever, how do we know it is expected behavior?

(please don't misinterpret the spirit in which I'm replying and asking for clarification -- I do appreciate the initial response but am truly not sure what should be displayed by me or unRAID and what is expected behavior with regard to replacing the cache drives)

Thanks again,

Ari

No problem. I hope this makes it clearer. "It is slightly confusing" refers to the fact that the second cache drive appears in the GUI not to be formatted or taking part in the pool. "It is expected behaviour" is the answer to your question

1 hour ago, adoucette said:

How should I fix this? Or is this the expected behavior?

 

The information for the whole pool is shown with the information for the first cache device, and each additional cache device has information specific to it.

OK, thanks. So the second cache drive does not show a filesystem or disk size, but does show reads and writes.

I will proceed with the assumption this is expected and correct behavior / display.

It is, the relevant pool data is shown on the cache page: