Jump to content
CowboyRedBeard

6.8.3 Disk writes causing high CPU

43 posts in this topic Last Reply

Recommended Posts

root@Tower:~# ls -lah /mnt/cache/system/docker
total 0
drwxrwxrwx 1 root   root   0 Mar 26 09:00 ./
drwxrwxrwx 1 nobody users 26 Feb  6  2019 ../
root@Tower:~# ls -lah /mnt/cache/system/libvirt
total 105M
drwxrwxrwx 1 root   root    22 Feb  6  2019 ./
drwxrwxrwx 1 nobody users   26 Feb  6  2019 ../
-rw-rw-rw- 1 nobody users 1.0G Mar 26 05:30 libvirt.img
root@Tower:~#

 

Share this post


Link to post

OK, that looks like the system folder on disk1 is obsolete.

 

From the command line again

cd /mnt/disk1
rm -r system

 

Share this post


Link to post

Looks good. None of system share on the array.

 

Go to Settings - Docker and change your docker image size to 20G then enable dockers. You can add your dockers back just as they were using the Previous Apps feature on the Apps page.

 

But, just as they were may not be good enough, since you had already filled 20G before.

 

How many dockers do you normally have installed?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

I had a good dozen, will they get all their config data back from /appdata ?

Do I have to reconfigure all the parameters, like mappings and stuff? Is there somewhere that has that still I can copy from?

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, CowboyRedBeard said:

I had a good dozen, will they get all their config data back from /appdata ?

Do I have to reconfigure all the parameters, like mappings and stuff? Is there somewhere that has that still I can copy from?

 

5 minutes ago, trurl said:

You can add your dockers back just as they were using the Previous Apps feature on the Apps page.

See this post I made yesterday for more explanation if you want to understand how this works:

 

https://forums.unraid.net/topic/90146-docker-fqdn/?do=findComment&comment=836919

 

Share this post


Link to post

OK, putting it all back together and will report. Is there a way to tell which of the apps was last installed? I have a few of them that I've installed from different sources, one worked well and the other didn't. So whatever one was last installed was the one I had working.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, CowboyRedBeard said:

Is there a way to tell which of the apps was last installed?

You might get some clue by checking the timestamps of the templates stored on flash in that folder I mentioned in the link.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

OK, so this is what I did. I created a share "sabtest" that was cache "no" and then copied the file structure of the cache only one "sab" to it....

This was the performance during copying from cache to the array:
image.thumb.png.1cb74444aad42a37b511d91a5617b254.png
 

 

That was 20G of files, from unfinished downloads.

 

 

This was performance during sab running to this array only share:

This is during download, and I think notable here is how it's now downloading at about 40% of the previous speed. And while the overall impairment of the system's performance and response of other services wasn't as bad... It's still sluggish.
image.thumb.png.a15243cb8e8d43a6ceb5bc4551cc3c1a.png

 

Interestingly enough, after the download has "finished" sab seems to hang up for a few minutes, before unpacking
image.thumb.png.fd92c886f4901044ba7c031edba40038.png

 

And then this is what it looks like during unpacking:

image.thumb.png.a049da62108ba94dad500b8ed09471a0.png

 

Share this post


Link to post

And this is copying from the array only sab test share to my media share, which is cache "yes"

 

So it's definitely something to do with the cache drives, which are new... and the previous ones did the same. This is not likely to be hardware I'm guessing, so I'm not sure where to look next. Thoughts?

 

image.thumb.png.579b93ecd17e57b9826fdf86badf1914.png

Share this post


Link to post

Are they the drives that require different starting offsets for best performance? I dont recall exact details but there was some noise about thing like that earlier in the forums. I dont know what ever resolved for that.

Share this post


Link to post

I have almost exactly the same server (128gb ram, dual xeon 2690, 2 x QVO 860 1 TB ) - same issue.
Sounds to me as if it is related to this topic :
 

 

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.