Unassigned Devices - Managing Disk Drives and Remote Shares Outside of The Unraid Array

dlandon

By dlandon
in Plugin Support

Recommended Posts

Recommended

Posted by dlandon,

If you are seeing unexplained disk or remote share activity, it may be due to cache dirs caching all folders.  For those of you using the Cache Dirs plugin, you need to specify folders to be included so UD mounted disks and shares do not get included automatically.  This can also apply to pool disks.  It's really the best practice to specify the included folders so you control what is actually being cached.
Recommended by Squid

0 reactions

Go to this post
Recommended

Posted by dlandon,

Major new release of UD: "Where are the switches?"  The "Pass Through", "Read Only", "Automount", and "Share" switches have been moved to a new Edit Settings dialog.  This is also where the script is modified.  This saves some real estate on the UD page and keeps the page refresh smooth. A "Show Partitions" switch has been added to set showing all partitions by specific hard drive device and not generically as before.  The option to show all partitions has been removed from the UD

New layout and features

Recommended by JonathanM

  • Thanks
  • Like

5 reactions

Go to this post
Recommended

Posted by dlandon,

New release of UD.  The changes are: - Add ability to spin down a disk by sdX.  You don't have to spin down disks by name= any more.  This is still available for spinning down a disk from a User Script because you won't know the correct sdX as it changes on reboot. - Add the ability to detach a disk when a UD script is finished using 'rc.unassigned'.  This detaches the disk from Unraid and should provide a potentially safer way to remove a USB device.  Applies to USB disks only. -
Recommended by SpencerJ
  • Upvote
  • Like

2 reactions

Go to this post
Recommended

Posted by dlandon,

There is a new feature in UD to help with plugins that need a mount point folder.  UD now creates a mount folder '/mnt/addons'.  This folder should be used to mount your plugin devices to prevent FCP warnings and keep your mounts separated from UD.  It is recommended you switch to this new folder for your addon and custom mounts.  You are welcome to leave the mounts at '/mnt/disks' or '/mnt/remotes'.  Things will still work, but if you request support for UD issues, you will be asked to remove t

UD is now creating a mount point folder for plugins and addons

Recommended by dlandon

0 reactions

Go to this post
  • Replies 10.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

dlandon
dlandon

It's that self healing feature I built into UD.  It just fixes itself.

dlandon
dlandon

New release of UD.  Changes: When changing the mount point (which is also the share name), the mount point is checked for a duplicate of a user share or another UD device.  Samba cannot handle

dlandon
dlandon

Major new release of UD: "Where are the switches?"  The "Pass Through", "Read Only", "Automount", and "Share" switches have been moved to a new Edit Settings dialog.  This is also where the sc

Posted Images

ailliano Rookie

ailliano

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, dlandon said:

This is confusing.  How does Windows mount the Synology?  Navigating the share how?

A windows host can mount a synology share without issue, I can either mount a drive in windows explorer, or I can go in the network and navigate the share there.

With that said, it means that the Synology is not the issue, ports are open otherwise windows wouldn't be able to mount the same folder I'm trying to mount in the Unraid, correct ? 

Link to comment
dlandon Veteran

dlandon

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 minute ago, ailliano said:

With that said, it means that the Synology is not the issue, ports are open otherwise windows wouldn't be able to mount the same folder I'm trying to mount in the Unraid, correct ? 

I don't think so.  I think you are confusing Windows browsing of shares with Unraid doing a CIFS mount.  They are different.

 

I have no issues mounting remote shares and have not heard of anyone else having issues like what you are having.  I'll keep looking, but I don't see anything.

 

The think the CIFS mount error is coming from the Synology and not from Unraid.  The research I did was of no help with this error code so I don't have any other suggestions.

Link to comment
ailliano Rookie

ailliano

Posted
Posted
46 minutes ago, dlandon said:

I don't think so.  I think you are confusing Windows browsing of shares with Unraid doing a CIFS mount.  They are different.

 

I have no issues mounting remote shares and have not heard of anyone else having issues like what you are having.  I'll keep looking, but I don't see anything.

 

The think the CIFS mount error is coming from the Synology and not from Unraid.  The research I did was of no help with this error code so I don't have any other suggestions.

I was able to successfully mount Synology share with CIFS on a linux vm, it's using SMB3 , unraid is the only one that can't mount this synology and not sure what else to look.
 

Link to comment
dlandon Veteran

dlandon

Posted
  • Author
Posted
4 minutes ago, ailliano said:

it's using SMB3

Which version of SMB was successful in mounting to the Synology.

 

UD attempts to mount the remote share with the following sequence of SMB versions:

  • None to see if the remote server offers a version it supports.
  • then 3.1.1
  • then 3.0
  • then 2.0
  • finally 1.0

The next version is tried if the previous version fails.

 

It may be that the Synology needs a specific version not included here, and I need to add another version to try.

 

Maybe NFS would be a better solution to mount the Synology remote share in your case.

Link to comment
ailliano Rookie

ailliano

Posted
Posted
22 minutes ago, dlandon said:

Which version of SMB was successful in mounting to the Synology.

 

UD attempts to mount the remote share with the following sequence of SMB versions:

  • None to see if the remote server offers a version it supports.
  • then 3.1.1
  • then 3.0
  • then 2.0
  • finally 1.0

The next version is tried if the previous version fails.

 

It may be that the Synology needs a specific version not included here, and I need to add another version to try.

 

Maybe NFS would be a better solution to mount the Synology remote share in your case.

Synology shows that the linux vm is connected with SMB3 but not sure about the specific version. even then I have synology to allow SMB2 except v1.0 which should be compatible between unraid and synology. I can do NFS again but was trying to take advantage of Multi-channel support.

Link to comment
dlandon Veteran

dlandon

Posted
  • Author
Posted
2 minutes ago, ailliano said:

Synology shows that the linux vm is connected with SMB3 but not sure about the specific version. even then I have synology to allow SMB2 except v1.0 which should be compatible between unraid and synology. I can do NFS again but was trying to take advantage of Multi-channel support.

Can you post the mount command from the Linux VM so I can compare?

Link to comment
Koenig Rookie

Koenig

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, dlandon said:

By your screen shot, you're on 6.11.5.  This post is about 6.12.0-rc5.

 

Move your post to the UD forum, post diagnostics again and we'll carry on there.

 

Yeah, the screenshot is from a unraid-server running 6.11.5 that is the one that contains the share that I'm mounting on one with unraid 6.12.0-rc5, wich is the one that is throwing CIFS-lines in the log.

 

Attaching diagnostics from both servers.

"unraid" runs RC5, "nas" runs 6.11.5 (stable)

 

A courious thing here is that "nas" (stable) also have a mounted SMB-share from "unraid" but is not throwing those errors into the log, while "unraid" (RC5) has a mounted share and thows a lot of those lines in the log

 

EDIT: Fixed the quote.

nas-diagnostics-20230503-2019.zip unraid-diagnostics-20230503-2019.zip

Edited by Koenig
Fixed the quote.
Link to comment
dlandon Veteran

dlandon

Posted
  • Author
Posted
29 minutes ago, ailliano said:

Sure ! 

loki-diagnostics-20230503-1427.zip 249.72 kB · 0 downloads

 

This is the command that is used on Unraid to mount your remote share: 

/sbin/mount -t cifs -o rw,noserverino,nounix,iocharset=utf8,file_mode=0777,dir_mode=0777,uid=99,gid=100,vers=3.1.1,credentials='/tmp/unassigned.devices/credentials_Unraid' '//DS918/Unraid' '/mnt/remotes/DS918_Unraid'

 

The credentials file contents are:

username=

password=

domain=

 

Try the command on Unraid and modify the options, etc and see if one of them is un-compatible with Synology.

 

I'm wondering if you didn't set a domain when you set up the share.

 

 

Link to comment
ailliano Rookie

ailliano

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, dlandon said: 
_mode=0777,dir_mode=0777,uid=99,gid=100,vers=3.1.1,credentials='/tmp/unassigned.devices/credentials_Unraid' '//DS918/Unraid' '/mnt/remotes/DS918_Unrai

 

5 minutes ago, dlandon said:

 

This is the command that is used on Unraid to mount your remote share: 

/sbin/mount -t cifs -o rw,noserverino,nounix,iocharset=utf8,file_mode=0777,dir_mode=0777,uid=99,gid=100,vers=3.1.1,credentials='/tmp/unassigned.devices/credentials_Unraid' '//DS918/Unraid' '/mnt/remotes/DS918_Unraid'

 

The credentials file contents are:

username=

password=

domain=

 

Try the command on Unraid and modify the options, etc and see if one of them is un-compatible with Synology.

 

I'm wondering if you didn't set a domain when you set up the share.

 

 

Thanks for checking, what domain would I use ? is that the WORKGROUP ? 

Link to comment
dlandon Veteran

dlandon

Posted
  • Author
Posted
48 minutes ago, Koenig said:

A courious thing here is that "nas" (stable) also have a mounted SMB-share from "unraid" but is not throwing those errors into the log, while "unraid" (RC5) has a mounted share and thows a lot of those lines in the log

 

I'm seeing this in the log: 

Apr 29 07:15:56 NAS  rpc.mountd[6334]: v4.0 client detached: 0x602ff7716405b917 from "192.168.8.30:702"
Apr 29 07:18:05 NAS kernel: CIFS: VFS: \\UNRAID\ISOs BAD_NETWORK_NAME: \\UNRAID\ISOs
### [PREVIOUS LINE REPEATED 9 TIMES] ###
Apr 29 07:18:19 NAS  ool www[4016]: Successful logout user root from 192.168.8.120
Apr 29 07:18:19 NAS kernel: CIFS: VFS: \\UNRAID\ISOs BAD_NETWORK_NAME: \\UNRAID\ISOs
### [PREVIOUS LINE REPEATED 14 TIMES] ###
Apr 29 07:18:43 NAS webGUI: Successful login user root from 192.168.8.120
Apr 29 07:18:44 NAS kernel: CIFS: VFS: \\UNRAID\ISOs BAD_NETWORK_NAME: \\UNRAID\ISOs
### [PREVIOUS LINE REPEATED 6 TIMES] ###

 

I'm not sure what this means, but the workgroup on your servers is not the same.  Unraid is ToK, NAS is TOK.  Windows doesn't care about the case because it is always upper case in Windows.  Linux may deal with it differently though because of the case difference.

Link to comment
Koenig Rookie

Koenig

Posted
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, dlandon said:

 

I'm seeing this in the log: 

Apr 29 07:15:56 NAS  rpc.mountd[6334]: v4.0 client detached: 0x602ff7716405b917 from "192.168.8.30:702"
Apr 29 07:18:05 NAS kernel: CIFS: VFS: \\UNRAID\ISOs BAD_NETWORK_NAME: \\UNRAID\ISOs
### [PREVIOUS LINE REPEATED 9 TIMES] ###
Apr 29 07:18:19 NAS  ool www[4016]: Successful logout user root from 192.168.8.120
Apr 29 07:18:19 NAS kernel: CIFS: VFS: \\UNRAID\ISOs BAD_NETWORK_NAME: \\UNRAID\ISOs
### [PREVIOUS LINE REPEATED 14 TIMES] ###
Apr 29 07:18:43 NAS webGUI: Successful login user root from 192.168.8.120
Apr 29 07:18:44 NAS kernel: CIFS: VFS: \\UNRAID\ISOs BAD_NETWORK_NAME: \\UNRAID\ISOs
### [PREVIOUS LINE REPEATED 6 TIMES] ###

 

I'm not sure what this means, but the workgroup on your servers is not the same.  Unraid is ToK, NAS is TOK.  Windows doesn't care about the case because it is always upper case in Windows.  Linux may deal with it differently though because of the case difference.

Nice catch, changed it too see if it matters.

Edited by Koenig
Link to comment
deusxanime Apprentice

deusxanime

Posted
Posted (edited)

Updated plugins, including UD, earlier today and now I'm realizing I don't have the UD SMB shares anymore. Any thing change that could have caused this? I tried disabling SMB share on the disk and re-enabling it, but still nothing there. Running unRAID 6.9.2.

 

edit: Huh, I was fiddling around and refreshed and now it has come back again... strange.

Edited by deusxanime
update
Link to comment
Koenig Rookie

Koenig

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, dlandon said:

 

I'm seeing this in the log: 

Apr 29 07:15:56 NAS  rpc.mountd[6334]: v4.0 client detached: 0x602ff7716405b917 from "192.168.8.30:702"
Apr 29 07:18:05 NAS kernel: CIFS: VFS: \\UNRAID\ISOs BAD_NETWORK_NAME: \\UNRAID\ISOs
### [PREVIOUS LINE REPEATED 9 TIMES] ###
Apr 29 07:18:19 NAS  ool www[4016]: Successful logout user root from 192.168.8.120
Apr 29 07:18:19 NAS kernel: CIFS: VFS: \\UNRAID\ISOs BAD_NETWORK_NAME: \\UNRAID\ISOs
### [PREVIOUS LINE REPEATED 14 TIMES] ###
Apr 29 07:18:43 NAS webGUI: Successful login user root from 192.168.8.120
Apr 29 07:18:44 NAS kernel: CIFS: VFS: \\UNRAID\ISOs BAD_NETWORK_NAME: \\UNRAID\ISOs
### [PREVIOUS LINE REPEATED 6 TIMES] ###

 

I'm not sure what this means, but the workgroup on your servers is not the same.  Unraid is ToK, NAS is TOK.  Windows doesn't care about the case because it is always upper case in Windows.  Linux may deal with it differently though because of the case difference.

Unfortunately me changing this so the setting says "ToK" on both servers didn't help, lines like the ones below continue to come frequently: 

May  4 02:28:55 Unraid kernel: CIFS: VFS: \\192.168.8.25\Backups Close unmatched open for MID:1182285
May  4 02:54:55 Unraid kernel: CIFS: VFS: \\192.168.8.25\Backups Close unmatched open for MID:1291108
May  4 02:57:00 Unraid kernel: CIFS: VFS: \\192.168.8.25\Backups Close unmatched open for MID:1299810
May  4 02:58:02 Unraid kernel: CIFS: VFS: \\192.168.8.25\Backups Close unmatched open for MID:1304178
May  4 03:17:17 Unraid kernel: CIFS: VFS: \\192.168.8.25\Backups Close unmatched open for MID:1384761

 

Link to comment
Koenig Rookie

Koenig

Posted
Posted
30 minutes ago, dlandon said:

Can you updatde the 6.11.5 server to 6.12?

It will eventually get updated, but probably not until there´s a 6.12.1 stable.

 

If that is the only course of action we have to wait, it is not like I will forget the issue anyway as there's plenty to remind me in the log ;-)

 

Link to comment
Goldmaster Apprentice

Goldmaster

Posted
Posted
On 3/1/2023 at 1:27 PM, csendre said:

Any idea what could be happening

 

Well, i had a similar issue as well. The system works fine and like you said end up with that. I also use /tmp for plex but how the heck does plex have to do with unassigned devices that would cause such issue? Its a minor thing, but when you need to use the web ui, its not allways practical to reboot.

Link to comment
itimpi Grand Master

itimpi

Posted
Posted

Earlier today while testing I accidentally did something that meant I ended up with about 15 drives under historical devices that I do not want to remain there.   I could successfully remove them one at a time by clicking on the 'x' against each drive, but I was wondering whether it would be practical to providing a mechanism for selecting multiple drives and then a Remove button that removes all selected drives at once rather than the 'x' against each drive?  Certainly not critical but thought it was worth asking.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment

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.

×
Go to topic listing