unRAID Server Release 5.0-beta2 Available

[SSD]

 

A few questions on the beta. I installed it just now,

 

In a word, "why?"

 

General users should never upgrade to a beta release of any software, unless 1) they have a specific problem that the Beta addresses or 2) they are willing to lose all their data for a chance to play around with the Beta version.

 

Betas are intended for TESTING on NON-CRITICAL systems.  If you want to evaluate a Beta of any software, you should set up a second server with no critical data on it.

 

The time is correct.... for GMT.  The Beta handles timezones differently and you have to select your time zone in the UI.  You have to export your shares because the default is not exported.  There are new security settings and features.

 

I generally agree with bubbaQ for most software, but have to admit that I have upgraded my main array to 5.0 beta2.  And I have done a lot of work on my array since doing so, including adding several precleared disks, upgrading a controller, and rearranging disks.  All has worked flawlessly.  I plan to do a disk upgrade soon.  So far so good. Only mysterious behaviour seems to be with spindowns (of which there are several threads) and SAS controller card HDIO errors.  I think these issues are common to 4.5.6 as well.

 

I still have not run the security update - wondering if that would interfere with moving back to 4.5.6 if I needed to.  I have not had any issues with security leaving it as it was.  Wondering why that script is required.

 

As far as when to upgrade, I don't think it is as simple as saying always stick with the production release.  We have seen beta versions go on ad infinitum and never get to a production release.  We've also seen production releases that seemed to pop out of nowhere with a new kernel and features and wind up having major bugs.  I'm not complaining, but in general I treat any unRAID new version about the same.

 

For unRAID, I treat any new release with caution, and give the community a chance to kick the tires pretty extensively.  Version x.x.1 (or b1)  of any release (prod or beta) almost always has problems and is quickly superceded.  Version x.x.2/b2 is sometimes stable, but usually also has a short lifespan.  Version x.x.3/b3 (sometimes tweaked to a version x.x.4/b4) are usually stable and long-lived.  If they are betas, this sometimes transitions to a prod release, but sometimes there is a long delay and then a new beta version (~b5) is born that you need to treat like an b1 release.

 

Bottom line -every user needs to decide when to make a change.  I upgrade pretty infrequently, but some new features are important to me and I update for them.  I also don't like to fall too far behind the tip release.

[bubbaQ]

Well there are good betas and bad betas... and good releases and bad releases.

 

The general principal to avoid betas on critical systems unless you need something they offer is subject to a premise... and the premise is that a beta should have fewer bugs than a release.  That is of course, not always true.

 

That also goes for releases too... I'm still running 4.4.2 on a production system.  No need to upgrade as I don't need anything offered in the later releases for that system, and upgrading potentially means downtime for me.

 

I have been on too many shakedown cruises because I needed something they offered.  If I *can* wait, I will and let others work things out before I put it into production.

 

At the same time, I am more than willing to put a new beta or alpha on a test system, and test it. 

[hades]

 

A few questions on the beta. I installed it just now,

 

In a word, "why?"

 

General users should never upgrade to a beta release of any software, unless 1) they have a specific problem that the Beta addresses or 2) they are willing to lose all their data for a chance to play around with the Beta version.

 

Betas are intended for TESTING on NON-CRITICAL systems.  If you want to evaluate a Beta of any software, you should set up a second server with no critical data on it.

 

The time is correct.... for GMT.  The Beta handles timezones differently and you have to select your time zone in the UI.  You have to export your shares because the default is not exported.  There are new security settings and features.

 

Stop the attitude. If it's such a taboo action to install a beta, don't make it available on the main page.

 

And although I didn't state it, yes I was trying to fix some issues I was having with the server that cable or switch replacements did not solve and I was at a loss as to what else to try. That was running a previous version. 4.6something. I didn't state any of this since it was never relevant to my original post.

 

If you do not wish to receive ANY feedback on the beta, then say so, although your attitude clearly says that.

 

Thanks for the help,

 

hades

[bubbaQ]

 

For unRAID, I treat any new release with caution, and give the community a chance to kick the tires pretty extensively.

 

A very wise policy.

[GK20]

If it's such a taboo action to install a beta, don't make it available on the main page.

 

Here is two cents from my many years of experience.

 

Although it is not taboo however anything comes with beta, i know if i want to use it i am on my own. That is to say even it is on main page

that doesn't meant you have to download and install it. It is on main page because it is convenient for whoever want to be a beta -tester to use

it. if you really want to use it then use it on a spare system is a wise decision. In corporation, the IT usually will not use a beta version software in production machine (sometimes not even some software patches) but rather on a spare machine before they make sure everything is fine.

 

Because i don't have spare machine (thinking about to build another one), so i don't bother to install any beta. at most i will wait for 5.0 RC version (Release Candidate). Even the production version released by limetech, i did not upgrade each version at all, for example, i was still using 4.5.3 until couple weeks ago and decided to upgrade to 4.5.6

 

[hades]

OK, I see noone wants to answer my simple question, but everyone is hung up on the fact that I dared to install a Beta. Google has a googol number of products in Beta, go jump down their throats.

 

I will ask my question this way. For the new features of 5, where can I find out the answers to these questions:

- On my shares tab, I have a list of shares, but some have green icons beside them, some have orange. What's the meaning of the colours?

- There are folders, that when I access them through the shares in Windows, are empty. But when I look at them from the 'Shares' tab (in the webgui), there are files under them. And there should be files under them. Any reason the files are missing when I look at the share in Windows?

 

Again, assume hypothetically I installed it on a test machine and am curious about these featuers. Ignore the fact that I dared to try it out on a real system.

 

hades

[Joe L.]

OK, I see noone wants to answer my simple question, but everyone is hung up on the fact that I dared to install a Beta. Google has a googol number of products in Beta, go jump down their throats.

 

I will ask my question this way. For the new features of 5, where can I find out the answers to these questions:

- On my shares tab, I have a list of shares, but some have green icons beside them, some have orange. What's the meaning of the colours?

No idea... perhaps related to the settings on that specific share.

- There are folders, that when I access them through the shares in Windows, are empty. But when I look at them from the 'Shares' tab (in the webgui), there are files under them. And there should be files under them. Any reason the files are missing when I look at the share in Windows?

Did you run the "New-Permissions" utility on the Utils tab?  It must be run to set the permissions properly on your files.  See the release notes for more info.

Again, assume hypothetically I installed it on a test machine and am curious about these featuers. Ignore the fact that I dared to try it out on a real system.

 

hades

You'll probably be fine putting the beta2 on a "real system" but just realize we don't know the answers either.  There is no documentation yet.  There are some risks, but it has been stable for many of us as far as the "data" is concerned.

[NAS]

For opinion for what its worth...

 

its a beta. Limetech LLC has tagged it a beta. It therefore by deifntion is a beta and cannot be anything else.

 

It might be a great beta, even a brilliant one but at best its been tested by a tiny fraction of unRAID users.

 

Coupled with the fact that we are getting zero feedback on it from Limetech LLC we would be remiss to suggest to anyone that its anything other than a beta of unknown stabilty.

 

There are far to many question marks for it to be anywhere near a live system for anyone that care about the data on that system

[meep]

It's even less than a beta.

 

beta releases are typically feature complete and are used to identify and resolve bugs through iterative releases with no new functionality added.

 

It's my understanding from reading these forums that 5.0b2 is far from feature complete and therefore should really be considered alpha level release.

 

Buyer beware. YMMV. Batteries not included. The value of your investment may fall as well as rise. Your home may be at risk. Yada Yada Yada.

 

[SSD]

I feel like such a rebel 8)

[tomb]

I would also be interested in trying the version with AFP.

[Stokkes]

Beta3 was supposed to come out months ago, but Tom has not whispered a word since.. Not sure what is going on with development as there was a thread where he mentioned it would be out in a few days (back in mid-August I think).

 

Hoping Beta3 comes out soon with AFP support and other goodies since we've all been good boys waiting

[JackBauer]

I just wish we had some idea when 5.0 might be officially released.

 

I was hoping to build a server and figured I'd wait until 5.0 was official.  At this rate...  no offense intended...  But it could be another year before its final.  (I say that only because it wouldn't be unreasonable for there to be 2-3 more beta's, and with the beta 3 delay after the "few days" comment...  well it doesn't give me a warm fuzzy feeling)

[SSD]

My advice would be to load Beta2 and not wait.  I have been using it for over a month - including some heavy duty array upgrades, and had no problems.  If you are nervous, use 4.5.6.  Either way, no sense waiting for the next version.

 

Tom (unRAID author) is a free spirit and comes and goes at will.  When he starts posting, it usually means that a new version is coming soon, and he sees it through a few updates until all major bugs are addressed.  But then he seems to disappear (he may be reading but does not respond to posts) for long periods of time.  I'm not sure the record but could be over a year (or maybe just felt like that long).  He does continue to respond to emails, however, so when major things come up like the 4.5.3 format bug, he engaged and got it fixed.  He does NOT always see a new version through to a production release.  When a stable beta is in place, he can begin a sebatical and that beta release becomes he defacto "production release".

 

I will admit this is frustrating.  I wish it were not so, but have also come to just accept it as reality.  unRAID is an awesome tool, and IMO worth this author eccentricity, but every user needs to make this determination for themself.  Most users here, except a rare few that have gotten really pissed off in long ranting threads about his absenses, are huge supporters and wish Tom only the best in the longterm success of unRAID.  But we all wish he were a more frequent participator in the forums.  

 

By reading the tea leaves, I believe that Beta2 will become a "defacto" production release for a while.  Hope that is not the case and Tom comes back with a beta3 or production 5.0 release soon, but I am not holding my breath.  Lots of promises were made about what would be in 5.0.  And only some of them have been realized.  Tom may be hesitate to "productionize" the release until his vision for 5.0 is completed, but I for one am fine with a more incremental approach with interim production releases in the "5.0.x" series.

[dschur]

Agreed, you and any new users coming into unRAID need to get uesed to it.

 

The "company" is a guy in his garage. He takes long breaks and the pace of development is slow. Not hearing anything for 6 months or so is pretty par for the course (in my experience of 5 years).

 

Too bad as an innovator could have radically changed the landscape.

[yannis]

I just wish we had some idea when 5.0 might be officially released.

 

I was hoping to build a server and figured I'd wait until 5.0 was official.  At this rate...  no offense intended...  But it could be another year before its final.  (I say that only because it wouldn't be unreasonable for there to be 2-3 more beta's, and with the beta 3 delay after the "few days" comment...  well it doesn't give me a warm fuzzy feeling)

 

As has been said, Unraid is awesome. So is the support you'll find on these forums. Unless there is a really compelling feature that 5.0 has which you really must have, then go with 4.5.6. It is rock solid stable and if you run into any problems at all, there are dozens of people here who will help you to get things sorted.

 

If you are the same JackBauer who sometimes posts of the mpc club forum, then you'll understand when I say the Unraid is nothing like certain media players. It does "everything it says on the tin" and does it extemely well. 

[JackBauer]

 

If you are the same JackBauer who sometimes posts of the mpc club forum, then you'll understand when I say the Unraid is nothing like certain media players. It does "everything it says on the tin" and does it extemely well. 

 

My reputation precedes me. 

 

I was sort of thinking just to "go with" 4.5.6...  Based on all the above (very helpful) comments.

 

I guess I need to really start researching my system.  The only component I know I'll buy is the Coolermaster 590.  (Yes I've read Raj's threads....  good ideas there)

 

MB is the biggest challenge...  Getting WOL, enough PCIe x4 slots for optimum expandability, on board video, and highly compatible with unraid....  Well, I don't see a ton of options.

 

I really liked the look of that Atom based system - passively cooled cpu...  But only one PCIe slot.

 

Anyway - as I said, have to spend some time doing some research.

 

Appreciate the info guys.  Thanks

[Kewjoe]

 

My reputation precedes me. 

 

I was sort of thinking just to "go with" 4.5.6...  Based on all the above (very helpful) comments.

 

I guess I need to really start researching my system.  The only component I know I'll buy is the Coolermaster 590.  (Yes I've read Raj's threads....  good ideas there)

 

MB is the biggest challenge...  Getting WOL, enough PCIe x4 slots for optimum expandability, on board video, and highly compatible with unraid....  Well, I don't see a ton of options.

 

I really liked the look of that Atom based system - passively cooled cpu...  But only one PCIe slot.

 

Anyway - as I said, have to spend some time doing some research.

 

Appreciate the info guys.  Thanks

 

Not the right thread for this, but the board i went with 1 year ago was this: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813182205&Tpk=MBD-X7SLA-H-O

 

1 x4 slot and 1 x8 slot. with 4 sata ports onboard. You could get 20 drives. has onboard video, an atom chip, etc. It has been very solid for me.

[Albin]

I just installed 5.0-beta2 (4.5 to 5.0-beta2) and I expected to see my shares gone from the UNRAID GUI, but they were still there.  (I thought I had to add them back... maybe I did not understand.. do I have to add them back meaning re add mapped network drives?

 

I removed the network drives from vista and then tried to add them back, but it would not let me, so I looked around in the new GUI and saw there was a one time execute for permissions that I needed to do, and it said it would take some time if you had a lot of files.  Once I executed the permissions option, the server seemed to go unresponsive.  I cannot ping it, I can't get to the GUI, and I can't do anything at the monitor/screen at the tower.  It seems to be locked up, and the last thing on the screen says "trace ends...followed by some type of number/code.

 

I do have a lot of files, but I am not sure how long to wait before I just reboot.

 

Is this to be expected when doing the one time permissions for 4.5 to 5.0 beta2 upgrades? (attached is my syslog just prior to hitting the permissions button)

 

I installed a new motherboard which is the ASRock P43DE (which is not on the compatibility list, but currently seems to be booting and work... except for this current issue) ... not sure if this may the culprit.

Please note I think the log will show that Twonky Media Server is not loading (I need to take this out of my go script... I am not using it)

 

Thanks for any help.

syslog_10-28-2010-859am.txt

[Joe L.]

I just installed 5.0-beta2 (4.5 to 5.0-beta2) and I expected to see my shares gone from the UNRAID GUI, but they were still there.  (I thought I had to add them back... maybe I did not understand.. do I have to add them back meaning re add mapped network drives?

 

I removed the network drives from vista and then tried to add them back, but it would not let me, so I looked around in the new GUI and saw there was a one time execute for permissions that I needed to do, and it said it would take some time if you had a lot of files.  Once I executed the permissions option, the server seemed to go unresponsive.  I cannot ping it, I can't get to the GUI, and I can't do anything at the monitor/screen at the tower.  It seems to be locked up, and the last thing on the screen says "trace ends...followed by some type of number/code.

 

I do have a lot of files, but I am not sure how long to wait before I just reboot.

 

Is this to be expected when doing the one time permissions for 4.5 to 5.0 beta2 upgrades? (attached is my syslog just prior to hitting the permissions button)

 

I installed a new motherboard which is the ASRock P43DE (which is not on the compatibility list, but currently seems to be booting and work... except for this current issue) ... not sure if this may the culprit.

Please note I think the log will show that Twonky Media Server is not loading (I need to take this out of my go script... I am not using it)

 

Thanks for any help.

It has to scan all your disks and change all the permissions.  Be patient.  Do not reboot.

[Albin]

It has to scan all your disks and change all the permissions.  Be patient.  Do not reboot.

 

Thanks 

[MvL]

Hi Limetech (Tom),

 

Probably you are very busy with development, but can you give us a update how development goes? Are you planning any updates for the 4.5 series? How goes development with 5.x series? Can you gives us please a answer?

 

Thank you

[hellbringer]

Maybe its just me not looking hard enough, but where is the option to disable the 'Disk Shares'?

Or is there an option via an INI file?

[BRiT]

Yes there is.

 

Click on each "disk" on the main panel, then under CIFS Export option select "No".

[hellbringer]

Yes there is.

 

Click on each "disk" on the main panel, then under CIFS Export option select "No".

 

Thanks!

 

Well there is an option I would like in a new (beta) version: set the options ALL disk shares at ONCE (like the spin down option per drive 'use default')