Jump to content
SpencerJ

Unraid 2020 Feature Request Wishlist

Unraid 2020 Wish List  

2143 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

279 posts in this topic Last Reply

Recommended Posts

Unfortunately I do not see any language other than English being likely in the near future.    The GUI is not engineered with multi-language support in mind so that the text can be stored in language specific files independently of the core GUI.    That means that an alternative language is an all-or-nothing option and requires someone who understands both English and the target language to do the work required for the initial version and to keep it up-to-date for new releases.

 

i would really like to see a move towards proper multi-language support so that over time users can provide the text later for their own native languages.   However I would expect that would be a multi-year project (if it ever even happens at all).

Share this post


Link to post

The alternative though is that you can have your browser (ie: Chrome) automatically translate everything whenever you go to the UI for unRaid.  Definitely won't be perfect, but it will probably get the point across of what you're attempting to do.

Share this post


Link to post
On 11/24/2019 at 1:18 PM, bastl said:

Snapshots as argument for preventing ransomware is a bit out of date. Almost all actual ransomware I read about deletes all versioning the user has access to provided by snapshots on the share level. Nontheless snapshots for VMs are really helpful and quick and I use it for almost a year with a script already.

 

Reading through all the features in the vote, I WANT THEM ALL 😁

Snapshops they way I figured it was meant is for VM's and dockers.... For data it is indead not very usefull.. Though probably not difficult to implement on top of vm and docker..

Share this post


Link to post

I would love to see silent corruption detection natively integrated with parity checking for automatic repairing of the corruption.  BTRFS only supports determining if there is corruption with a single drive, but the data exists in parity.  Shouldn't have to go dig up a backup for this.  Same with the Dynamix File Integrity plugin, from what I understand.  

Edited by robobub

Share this post


Link to post

Cheeky, but: SystemD

 

Yes, i know this is built on Slackware so it's not going to happen without Slackware adopting it. :(

 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, BRiT said:

Hell no, no SystemD at all.

Haha.. not trying to bait, but you know it's pretty much inevitable. Already there's only a handful of hold-outs. I acknowledge unRAID is not going to replace their base (maybe ever*) and it will almost certainly have to come from Slackware and that if it ever* happens, it will be a long time from now. And then the development/testing work by Limeware might be quite significant too.

 

* ever is a long time, but you know what i mean.

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, robobub said:

but the data exists in parity.

No it does not!    This statement implies that you do not understand how parity works so it may well be worth reading up on this.

Share this post


Link to post

I'd like Snapshots followed by Multiple Arrays.

 

Snapshots are a must IMO for UnRAID to be adopted by small businesses.  I put in a ReadyNAS at work simply due to Snapshots and the cryptolocker viruses.

 

At home I use UnRAID as primary but have a ReadyNAS for backups just for snapshots.

Share this post


Link to post

The ability to use Unraid without having an Array. Lets the user configure where the data of the "system" disk goes. Make an API that a plugin like ZFS could tell that everything needed is ready to go. Pricing could be an issue - make it a "Pro" feature. Its still cheaper than wasting a valuable drive slot...

 

Edited by miine
forgot that pricing is based on number of storage devices...

Share this post


Link to post
21 hours ago, itimpi said:

No it does not!    This statement implies that you do not understand how parity works so it may well be worth reading up on this.

Please help me understand how that statement is incorrect.  Unless you're being pedantic and would prefer "the data can be reconstructed from parity and the other drives"

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, robobub said:

Please help me understand how that statement is incorrect. 

Parity1 is an equation that sums the total of the bits and modifies the parity drive to force the answer of the equation to be even (0).

So, if parity is found to be incorrect, the error could possibly be in any of the drives, there is no way to single it down to any particular drive. If one of the drives fails, then it's obvious which drive to recreate, and that is done seamlessly, but if all of the drives are operating normally there is no way to know which bit of the parity sum is wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
22 hours ago, itimpi said:

No it does not!    This statement implies that you do not understand how parity works so it may well be worth reading up on this.

38 minutes ago, jonathanm said:

Parity1 is an equation that sums the total of the bits and modifies the parity drive to force the answer of the equation to be even (0).

So, if parity is found to be incorrect, the error could possibly be in any of the drives, there is no way to single it down to any particular drive. If one of the drives fails, then it's obvious which drive to recreate, and that is done seamlessly, but if all of the drives are operating normally there is no way to know which bit of the parity sum is wrong.

I see where the misunderstanding is coming from.  You've missed an important part of my feature request: integration with checksumming.  That is what both BTRFS and Dynamix File Integrity that I mention offer for detecting errors.  That tells you which drive has the error, and where.  Then it's a matter of using parity to determine which bit(s) are corrupted.  This is essentially how BTRFS and ZFS can do that silent corruption repair when they have parity.  Does that make sense?

Edited by robobub

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, robobub said:

This is essentially how BTRFS and ZFS can do that silent corruption repair when they have parity.  Does that make sense?

Both btrfs and zfs can repair data corruption when used in redundant pools, Unraid uses individual filesystem for each disk, so either filesystem can detect but not fix corruption, I don't see how parity could ever work in together with a filesystem to automatically fix corruption, though it's possible that if you detected corruption on a single disk and assuming parity wasn't synced after that you could rebuild that disk, but that is something you can already do.

Share this post


Link to post



Both btrfs and zfs can repair data corruption when used in redundant pools, Unraid uses individual filesystem for each disk, so either filesystem can detect but not fix corruption, I don't see how parity could ever work in together with a filesystem to automatically fix corruption, though it's possible that if you detected corruption on a single disk and assuming parity wasn't synced after that you could rebuild that disk, but that is something you can already do.


Unraid has redundancy, it's just distributed differently. And yes, the idea is parity would not be synced in this scenario because the first read after bitrot occurs, the individual disk filesystem notices a different checksum. Unraid would then need to read all the corresponding sections from other disks to figure out which exact bits changed in the extent. Yes, literally rebuilding from parity, but automatically and just that one corrupted extent.

Now, this would require more synchronization between a checksumming filesystem and Unraid and maybe that is not easily achievable.

Share this post


Link to post
On 11/25/2019 at 4:04 PM, limetech said:

What we want to do is add option in VM manager that says, "Create snapshot upon shut-down or hibernation" and then add a nice GUI to handle snapshots and backups.  I have found btrfs send/recv somewhat fragile which is one reason we haven't tackled this yet.

 

Maybe there's some interest in a blog post describing the process along with the script I use?

 

What about nightly snapshots?  Is it not possible to do the snapshots without hibernating or shutting down the VM?

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, dorgan said:

Is it not possible to do the snapshots without hibernating or shutting down the VM?

Possible, yes. But if you do a live snapshot, the result will be equivalent to what would happen if you did an unclean powerdown. Depending on the specific guest OS in combination with virtio tools and how it handles open files, journaling, etc, the resulting backup may or may not be useable.

 

If the guest is powered off, the snapshot is guaranteed to be clean.

Share this post


Link to post
13 hours ago, dorgan said:

What about nightly snapshots?  Is it not possible to do the snapshots without hibernating or shutting down the VM?

Like jonathanm mentioned this will cause the VMs to be in a crash consistent state, but I do daily snapshots with all the VMs online and take one weekly snapshot after shutting down/hibernate them all, if I need to restore I try to use an offline snapshot, but this gives more options, I have used online snapshots before without apparent issues, it's like a crash on a bare metal OS, most times they boot back up just fine.

Share this post


Link to post

I would like a cache setting that allows files to be on both cache pool and array.

Share this post


Link to post
14 hours ago, sosdk said:

I would like a cache setting that allows files to be on both cache pool and array.

Yes.  Yeeeeesssssss.  This!  

 

I realize that is asking a lot, as typically files are only allowed to exist in one or the other, not both, and this probably throws off some internal checks.  But it is definitely a feature I want (plus SSD/NVMe array support, which got a lot of votes but no mentions).

 

My use case is that I have certain data (music/mp3's, software code, etc.) that I want immediate, fast access to all the time, without spinning up any drives, so it makes sense to put them on my NVMe cache drive.  But I want that data backed up too.  Sure, I can buy another $600 2TB NVMe drive just to create a mirrored cache pool, but ouch that's a lot of $$$.  I'd rather give Lime-Tech $120 for another license that I don't need (let's call it a donation, baby), so that these files can be stored both in my protected array and my unprotected cache.  All reads would come from cache, and all writes would go to both (or cache first, sync later).

 

I had a script a while back that was syncing a few directories from my cache drive to my array, but it stopped working a while back and I haven't bothered to try and fix it.  Plus, I think it was causing those duplicate file error messages as Unraid was detecting I had the same file in cache and the array, so I've been hesitant to try doing this again.  I looked for a plugin that would handle this and found nothing.

 

Native Unraid functionality for a "Use Cache Disk: Both" option would be awesome.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

Easy way to remove a disk from the array, one button that moves data on the disk and then removes it from the array, which I can then remove it from the system and replace it. Same with a add disk to array. All without shutting down the array.

Edited by Manwdaplan

Share this post


Link to post
On 12/29/2019 at 2:48 AM, BRiT said:

Hell no, no SystemD at all.

That was exactly the response I predicted from you!  I've been hanging around here for too many years 🤣

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.