user share location does not work correctly

[avpap]

I have created a new user share that I want to exclude it from disk1 (I have disk1,2,3,4,5). I tried putting disk2,3,4,5 in included disks, I tried putting disk1 in excluded disks and when they both failed I tried both at the same time (although I know you aren't supposed to have both included and excluded disks at the same time). Nothing seems to work. When I try to move on folder from /mnt/user/downloads (it is on disk1) to /mnt/user/apps (the user share I want to reside in disks2,3,4,5) the folder is moved to disk1 (inside the /mnt/user/apps share). I tried restarting the server (after changing the share location), but nothing changed.

 

Is it a bug or am I doing something wrong? I tried both dolphin and midnight commander.

[trurl]

Linux sees them as both being /mnt/user so just moves them on the same disk instead of copy/delete. This isn't the way it seems like it should work, but isn't likely to change.

 

I always work directly with the disks if I am on the server, and always exclusively with user shares over the network.

 

Another possibility if the destination is a cached share is just move it to cache disk and let mover sort it out. That way you can let the user shares decide which disk to put it on. 

[avpap]

Thank you! However both sickrage and couch potato which are installed as Docker apps, move files correctly. How is this possible?

[gubbgnutten]

1 hour ago, avpap said:

Thank you! However both sickrage and couch potato which are installed as Docker apps, move files correctly. How is this possible?

 

It is absolutely possible if they are mapped against multiple /mnt/user/[name of share] rather than one single /mnt/user.

[SSD]

I will also say that user shares and include/exclude disks are a little deceiving.

 

First - excluding only applies to SOME new files that are written. If there is a disk with the share name as a root level folder - it's data will be seen in the user share, even if that disk is excluded (or not included). And if a file is written to a subdirectory that is on the excluded disk,and that subdirectory is deeper than the split level - that disk WILL get the new file even if it is excluded (or not included).

 

BTW - suggest using include or exclude - not both.

 

The only way to truly exclude a disk is to use the global exclusion. Then the disk is not participating in any shares. Period.

[avpap]

An update on my issue. When copying from disk to share everything worked fine.

[gubbgnutten]

3 hours ago, avpap said:

An update on my issue. When copying from disk to share everything worked fine.

 

Copying should work fine, only moves within the same mount point are problematic.

 

On a related note - Don't mix disks and user shares unless you know exactly what you are doing, there are situations where you can lose data...

[avpap]

Sorry, my mistake. I meant moving

[SSD]

Here is a use case that ABSOLUTELY creates data loss.

 

User share contains three disks - disk1, disk2, disk3. Owner decides to consolidate into disk1 and disk2. So excludes disk3 from the user share (not globally). And then copies everything from the disk3 directory to the user share of the same name. Poof. All those files that were on disk3 are truncated and useless.

 

Follow the simple rule and stay out of trouble. Move or copy between disk shares or user shares, but don't mix.

[avpap]

Thank you!