OK, so I know that UnRAID doesen´t have any error reporting unless you install a hack/addon (a great and very smart addon by the way!). This is not what this thread is about.

 

This is about which physical drive it is that has failed. I mean if I go and check the status manually and see that "Oh, drive 4 is malfunctioning/has crashed!", how do I know which drive to replace?

 

I was thinking about adding like 5 drives in the beginning, and then when the RAID is all setup and ready I would disconnect one drive at a time and see what the reports are, and then of course mark those drives (and cables) with the appropriate number. Whenever I would add drives I would do the same thing, and mark them with the assigned drive numbers.

 

But is there a easier way? Can I read the serialnumbers on the drives somewhere in the UnRAID management? Like "Channel 1 is connected to Samsung 1229889-34, Channel 2 is connected to Samsung 344550-3, Channel 3 is connected to Seagate 4445509-3" and so on.

 

If this feature exists, it would be a very easy task to know what drives are assigned whatever numbers/channels. Just note the serialnumbers when slamming them all in the case and then from the UnRAID management see what channels they are assigned, and then just mark the drives with whatever channels/numbers they are assigned.

 

Clearly, you do not yet have your server up and running.  unRaid DOES have error reporting, just no e-mail or active LAN notification built in at this time. You must periodically visit its web-status page to learn of its health.

 

The unRaid web-management page lists the drives by their model and serial number along with their status. This has existed in every version of unRaid.  It is VERY easy to see what drive has failed when a failure occurs.  The "green" status indicator to the left of the drive label shows it is OK.  A "red" indicator shows that a drive is off-line for some reason.

 

The web-page looks like this when a failure occurs:

 

The add-on script I created eliminates the need to visit the management page to learn a drive has failed, but to instead get a proactive alert. 

 

Joe L.

 

Clearly, you do not yet have your server up and running.

 

Nope, not yet.

I haven´t even bought any hardware for it, I will build it from scratch with new hardware.

 

unnRaid DOES have error reporting, just no e-mail or active LAN notification built in at this time. Youo must periodically visit its web-status page to learn of its health.

 

Oh, I understood that.

 

But I wouldn´t call that error reporting (since reporting is something that it should do actively). I would call it... I don´t know. The ability to check for errors?

English is not my native language, but I wouldn´t go as far as call something I need to check manually for "reporting".

 

A report is something that should be delivered to me, whenever there is something to report.

 

The unRaid web-management page lists the drives by their model and serial number along with their status. .... The web-page looks like this when a failure occurs:

 

Ah, very nice indeed!

Thanks for the info!

 

The add-on script I created eliminates the need to visit the management page to learn a drive has failed, but to instead get a proactive alert. 

 

Yeah, this add-on script raises the security level a lot. Lets say for some reason one disk fails, one of the disks that I don´t use very often. and lets say that I check the status on the UnRAID once a week. If the drive fails in the beginning of this week it means that I go without protection until I go and manually check the status of the UnRAID. If another disk would fail before I get the chance to put in a new disk it would mean I would loose the data on both disks.

 

Getting a proactive alert really does raise the security level a lot. Whenever one of my RAID 5 arrays need to rebuild the array or a disk fails I get an audible alarm "beep...-beep...-beep...-beep...". An audible alarm would be even more fantastic than a LAN alert, since it is detected right away. I would probably detect a LAN alert almost as fast since I am working on that very LAN every day (I work from home).

 

But getting no alert... would make me feel unsecure. I would probably go check the status several times each week, just to make sure it is OK.

I don´t like feeling unsecure...

 

I too work from home.  Your command of english is very good, no need to apologize.

 

Like you, I prefer an active alert rather than a passive one where I would have to visit the management page to see the status.  That is exactly why I created the alert shell scripts.  Tom has active alerts on his to-do list, but security and writable share drives are a much higher priority.  For now, the shell scripts are very easy to install and work perfectly.

 

I know drives will fail, but unRaid spins down drives when they are not used for some period, so it is unlikely for a failure to occur when you are away (unless, of course, a family member is using the array in your absence)  In that way, a failure is less likely than in other situations.

 

I've seen your posts as you decide on your hardware.  The limiting factor for speed is probably the PCI bus, far more than the CPU.  My unRaid server was built using the originally specified Intel motherboard and CPU and is entirely IDE based.  Im my tests, it can serve 4 separate ISO images, to 4 clients on my LAN, from an off-line (defective) drive,while rebuilding that defective drive from parity and the remaining drives and re-building the 4 DVD ISO images to serve from the defective drive.  When it was doing all this the CPU was not very busy at all and nowhere near maxed out.  The disks obviously were fairly busy.

 

Good luck as you build your server.

 

Joe L.

 

 

The limiting factor for speed is probably the PCI bus, far more than the CPU.  My unRaid server was built using the originally specified Intel motherboard and CPU and is entirely IDE based.  Im my tests....When it was doing all this the CPU was not very busy at all and nowhere near maxed out.  The disks obviously were fairly busy.

 

Good luck as you build your server.

 

Yeah, I have found the thread where you described it. Talk about stressing the UnRAID!

"normal" DVD streams are pretty easy to serve, it is when (or rather if) multiple HD streams would be served simultaneously, this would probably be very heavy for the UnRAID (or rather the network connection and swich, or the bus-speed on the motherboard or something like that).

 

So now I know the CPU is not a limiting factor, a less powerful CPU will do just fine (although I guess I will be using a Core2 since I think they use less power. That means more power to the disks.).

 

I wonder what kind of bus speed the onboard SATA connections have... too much techie-head stuff to search for in the hunt for the perfect motherboard. This is not information they usually show (I guess it is pretty unusual that anyone needs that information). I bet it is somehwere in the Gigabyte webpage, but I´m not sure what to search for, there is too much to read...

 

Thanks for your answers!