8 minutes ago, Lev said:

A enhancement request... as the number of drives grows in my UD list in the GUI, I find I have to press the (+) to expand each drive to find the one that has the mount point I'm looking for.

 

Not sure what the right enhancement is, perhaps a way to expand them all at once to make all the mount points visible?

 

 

Along these lines it would be nice to be able to change the partition name on devices. I keep data on different drives and it can be difficult to keep track of them without the partition labels. Particularly if using them on another system.

1 hour ago, TexasUnraid said:

Along these lines it would be nice to be able to change the partition name on devices. I keep data on different drives and it can be difficult to keep track of them without the partition labels. Particularly if using them on another system.

What do you mean by partition name?

1 minute ago, dlandon said:

What do you mean by partition name?

When I mount an NTFS drive it shows me the partition name that I game it in windows. I use these to keep drives in order (personal backup 1, personal backup 2, Media backup 1, media backup 2 etc).

 

It is really hard to keep track of the drives without these drive / partition names.

 

Does linux not support partition/drive names like windows? There is no way to label the drives to keep track of them across systems?

 

If I needed to use the backup drives, there is a high likely hood they would need to be used in another system.

24 minutes ago, TexasUnraid said:

Does linux not support partition/drive names like windows? There is no way to label the drives to keep track of them across systems?

Click on the partition name and change it.  Hover your mouse over the partition name for details.

2 minutes ago, dlandon said:

Click on the partition name and change it.  Hover your mouse over the partition name for details.

 

Does that actually change the partition name? I did that but when I cleared the config file when troubleshooting they all reverted to the default names.

 

This lead me to believe that the names UD displays are just share names and not actually changing the partition names?

4 hours ago, TexasUnraid said:

 

Does that actually change the partition name? I did that but when I cleared the config file when troubleshooting they all reverted to the default names.

 

This lead me to believe that the names UD displays are just share names and not actually changing the partition names?

What format partitions are you wanting to label?  Linux choices are fairly limited.

6 minutes ago, dlandon said:

What format partitions are you wanting to label?  Linux choices are fairly limited.

I wondered if that might be the case. I tried with BTRFS which seemed to say it supports labels.

 

Also had an XFS drive in the UD I think.

10 minutes ago, TexasUnraid said:

I wondered if that might be the case. I tried with BTRFS which seemed to say it supports labels.

 

Also had an XFS drive in the UD I think.

Looks like I might be able to do ntfs, xfs, and btrfs.  I'm looking into it.

I've implemented changing the physical disk volume label on xfs, btrfs, vfat, ntfs, and encrypted disks when the mountpoint is changed.

11 minutes ago, dlandon said:

I've implemented changing the physical disk volume label on xfs, btrfs, vfat, ntfs, and encrypted disks when the mountpoint is changed.

Very cool! You sure work fast!

13 minutes ago, TexasUnraid said:

Very cool! You sure work fast!

Not difficult, just had to find all the different commands for each file system type.  There are a few limitations - ntfs label is limited to 32 characters, vfat is upper case only and limited to 11 characters.  Not sure of the limits on xfs and btrfs file systems.

32 minutes ago, dlandon said:

I've implemented changing the physical disk volume label on xfs, btrfs, vfat, ntfs, and encrypted disks when the mountpoint is changed.

Awesome work, this will come in handy for sure.

11 hours ago, Lev said:

A enhancement request... as the number of drives grows in my UD list in the GUI, I find I have to press the (+) to expand each drive to find the one that has the mount point I'm looking for.

 

Not sure what the right enhancement is, perhaps a way to expand them all at once to make all the mount points visible?

I've seen your request and I'm pondering a possible solution.

Hi @dlandon - Thanks for the UD/UD+ Plugins. Need some help!

 

I just installed 3 SSDs simultaneously to Unraid.

- SanDisk z400s as cache drive that works good.

- Also installed Samsung 960 pro nvme as Auto-Mount Unassigned Drive (plex_appdata) working ok upto now.

- SSD with Issue:

>>>Added Crucial MX500 1TB SSD as Auto-Mount Unassigned Drive (download folder) and after a few minutes it spins down and stops working and goes to Historical Drive after a few minutes.<<<

Any pointers for me?

 

Thanks in Advance.

Cheers!

3 minutes ago, Shomil Saini said:

Hi @dlandon - Thanks for the UD/UD+ Plugins. Need some help!

 

I just installed 3 SSDs simultaneously to Unraid.

- SanDisk z400s as cache drive that works good.

- Also installed Samsung 960 pro nvme as Auto-Mount Unassigned Drive (plex_appdata) working ok upto now.

- SSD with Issue:

>>>Added Crucial MX500 1TB SSD as Auto-Mount Unassigned Drive (download folder) and after a few minutes it spins down and stops working and goes to Historical Drive after a few minutes.<<<

Any pointers for me?

 

Thanks in Advance.

Cheers!

Check your disk cabling and connections.

20 minutes ago, dlandon said:

Check your disk cabling and connections.

 

Hey,

I already did that, the same port was working beautifully for my regular spinning SATA drive. It is a R720xd Drive Bay on the back!

Just Changed the settings to stop spin down. Will let you know if that works.

 

Edited June 28, 20206 yr by Shomil Saini
UD settings changed

1 hour ago, dlandon said:

Check your disk cabling and connections.

 

1 hour ago, Shomil Saini said:

 

Hey,

I already did that, the same port was working beautifully for my regular spinning SATA drive. It is a R720xd Drive Bay on the back!

Just Changed the settings to stop spin down. Will let you know if that works.

 

 

This seems to have worked! Can advise this to other with similar issue.

 

Thanks and Stay Safe Everyone!

28 minutes ago, Shomil Saini said:

 

 

This seems to have worked! Can advise this to other with similar issue.

 

Thanks and Stay Safe Everyone!

The command to put a drive in standby should not cause a SSD disk to stop working, but I've seen this before.  I have several Samsung SSDs and have never had the issue myself.

New UD release features:

• Changing the mount point will now change the physical disk label on ntfs, btrfs, xfs, vfat, btrfs encrypted, and xfs encrypted disks.
• There is a new switch in the upper right corner of the UD page ('None' and 'All') that will show all partitions on all disks when switched on.  This is a UD setting and not a cookie, so it will be persistent.

Thanks @Lev and @TexasUnraid for your ideas.

26 minutes ago, dlandon said:

New UD release features:

• Changing the mount point will now change the physical disk label on ntfs, btrfs, xfs, vfat, btrfs encrypted, and xfs encrypted disks.
• There is a new switch in the upper right corner of the UD page ('None' and 'All') that will show all partitions on all disks when switched on.  This is a UD setting and not a cookie, so it will be persistent.

Thanks @Lev and @TexasUnraid for your ideas.

Great, very handy additions!

1 hour ago, dlandon said:

New UD release features:

• Changing the mount point will now change the physical disk label on ntfs, btrfs, xfs, vfat, btrfs encrypted, and xfs encrypted disks.
• There is a new switch in the upper right corner of the UD page ('None' and 'All') that will show all partitions on all disks when switched on.  This is a UD setting and not a cookie, so it will be persistent.

Thanks @Lev and @TexasUnraid for your ideas.

Works awesome No more playing hide and seek trying to guess which drive has the mount I'm looking for. Love the change. Thank you!

I have a question I could use some help with:

 

I'd like to specify what is shared to certain users on this unassigned device hard drive.  It seems to be all or nothing for all unassigned device shares.  I'd like to give a certain user read-write access to one folder and disallow access to another folder of the drive.  Is there a way to keep the drive off the array while being able to specify which users have read / write access to specific folders on the drive?

 

I am relatively new to unraid and would like to be able to have a backup drive in my unraid server for the super important stuff, especially since it's the only PC behind a good UPS.  I have installed unassigned devices and user scripts to automatically backup important files on the main array with rsync.  Ideally I would keep it as NTFS file system to make it compatible with windows just-in-case... but looks like in a future version of unraid I will be able to just pop it into another array pool and create more than 1 user share on the drive.

9 hours ago, Unraid User 1223. said:

I have a question I could use some help with:

 

I'd like to specify what is shared to certain users on this unassigned device hard drive.  It seems to be all or nothing for all unassigned device shares.  I'd like to give a certain user read-write access to one folder and disallow access to another folder of the drive.  Is there a way to keep the drive off the array while being able to specify which users have read / write access to specific folders on the drive?

 

I am relatively new to unraid and would like to be able to have a backup drive in my unraid server for the super important stuff, especially since it's the only PC behind a good UPS.  I have installed unassigned devices and user scripts to automatically backup important files on the main array with rsync.  Ideally I would keep it as NTFS file system to make it compatible with windows just-in-case... but looks like in a future version of unraid I will be able to just pop it into another array pool and create more than 1 user share on the drive.

That level of permission control would have to to be done with Linux permissions, or through array shares.

I've been puzzled for the last week why most of my XFS partitions were reporting 'sectsz=512' and a few were reporting 'sectsz=4096' and traced it to a whether the drive had been partitioned and formated by UnRAID or UnAssigned Devices. I put the detailed log output at the very bottom to show both outputs.

 

Researching if an answer existed already I had to take a trip down memory lane searching through the posts to recall that UD didn't always create UnRAID compatible partitions. I remember those days but didn't find an answers to why the difference.

 

I went deeper into the code and traced it to the difference in the following commands:

 

# Create new UnRAID Partition
sgdisk -o -a 8 -n 1:32K:0 {$dev}

# Create UnAssigned Disk Partition
sgdisk -o -a 1 -n 1:32K:0 {$dev}

 

What's the real impact?  🤷‍♂️ Both ways work and are functional, however the UnRAID command aligning on "-a 8" does seem to not trigger an alignment warning.

 

# UnRAID partition creation
# sgdisk -Z /dev/sde
GPT data structures destroyed! You may now partition the disk using fdisk or
other utilities.

# sgdisk -o -a 8 -n 1:32K:0 /dev/sde
Creating new GPT entries in memory.
The operation has completed successfully.

# UnAssigned Devices partition creation
# sgdisk -Z /dev/sde
GPT data structures destroyed! You may now partition the disk using fdisk or
other utilities.

# sgdisk -o -a 1 -n 1:32K:0 /dev/sde
Creating new GPT entries in memory.
Warning: Setting alignment to a value that does not match the disk's
physical block size! Performance degradation may result!
Physical block size = 4096
Logical block size = 512
Optimal alignment = 8 or multiples thereof.
The operation has completed successfully.

 

 

Detailed XFS_INFO output from two drives for comparison

Partitioned and Formated by UnRAID v6.8.3
# xfs_info /dev/sde1
meta-data=/dev/sde1              isize=512    agcount=11, agsize=268435455 blks
         =                       sectsz=512   attr=2, projid32bit=1
         =                       crc=1        finobt=1, sparse=1, rmapbt=0
         =                       reflink=1
data     =                       bsize=4096   blocks=2929721331, imaxpct=5
         =                       sunit=0      swidth=0 blks
naming   =version 2              bsize=4096   ascii-ci=0, ftype=1
log      =internal log           bsize=4096   blocks=521728, version=2
         =                       sectsz=512   sunit=0 blks, lazy-count=1
realtime =none                   extsz=4096   blocks=0, rtextents=0

Partitioned and Formated by UnAssigned Devices v2020.06.28
# xfs_info /dev/sdas1
meta-data=/dev/sdas1             isize=512    agcount=8, agsize=268435455 blks
         =                       sectsz=4096  attr=2, projid32bit=1
         =                       crc=1        finobt=1, sparse=1, rmapbt=0
         =                       reflink=1
data     =                       bsize=4096   blocks=1953506633, imaxpct=5
         =                       sunit=0      swidth=0 blks
naming   =version 2              bsize=4096   ascii-ci=0, ftype=1
log      =internal log           bsize=4096   blocks=521728, version=2
         =                       sectsz=4096  sunit=1 blks, lazy-count=1
realtime =none                   extsz=4096   blocks=0, rtextents=0

 

Any thoughts on this @dlandon ?

4 hours ago, Lev said:

I've been puzzled for the last week why most of my XFS partitions were reporting 'sectsz=512' and a few were reporting 'sectsz=4096' and traced it to a whether the drive had been partitioned and formated by UnRAID or UnAssigned Devices. I put the detailed log output at the very bottom to show both outputs.

 

Researching if an answer existed already I had to take a trip down memory lane searching through the posts to recall that UD didn't always create UnRAID compatible partitions. I remember those days but didn't find an answers to why the difference.

 

I went deeper into the code and traced it to the difference in the following commands:

 

# Create new UnRAID Partition
sgdisk -o -a 8 -n 1:32K:0 {$dev}

# Create UnAssigned Disk Partition
sgdisk -o -a 1 -n 1:32K:0 {$dev}

 

What's the real impact?  🤷‍♂️ Both ways work and are functional, however the UnRAID command aligning on "-a 8" does seem to not trigger an alignment warning.

 

# UnRAID partition creation
# sgdisk -Z /dev/sde
GPT data structures destroyed! You may now partition the disk using fdisk or
other utilities.

# sgdisk -o -a 8 -n 1:32K:0 /dev/sde
Creating new GPT entries in memory.
The operation has completed successfully.

# UnAssigned Devices partition creation
# sgdisk -Z /dev/sde
GPT data structures destroyed! You may now partition the disk using fdisk or
other utilities.

# sgdisk -o -a 1 -n 1:32K:0 /dev/sde
Creating new GPT entries in memory.
Warning: Setting alignment to a value that does not match the disk's
physical block size! Performance degradation may result!
Physical block size = 4096
Logical block size = 512
Optimal alignment = 8 or multiples thereof.
The operation has completed successfully.

 

 

Detailed XFS_INFO output from two drives for comparison

Partitioned and Formated by UnRAID v6.8.3
# xfs_info /dev/sde1
meta-data=/dev/sde1              isize=512    agcount=11, agsize=268435455 blks
         =                       sectsz=512   attr=2, projid32bit=1
         =                       crc=1        finobt=1, sparse=1, rmapbt=0
         =                       reflink=1
data     =                       bsize=4096   blocks=2929721331, imaxpct=5
         =                       sunit=0      swidth=0 blks
naming   =version 2              bsize=4096   ascii-ci=0, ftype=1
log      =internal log           bsize=4096   blocks=521728, version=2
         =                       sectsz=512   sunit=0 blks, lazy-count=1
realtime =none                   extsz=4096   blocks=0, rtextents=0

Partitioned and Formated by UnAssigned Devices v2020.06.28
# xfs_info /dev/sdas1
meta-data=/dev/sdas1             isize=512    agcount=8, agsize=268435455 blks
         =                       sectsz=4096  attr=2, projid32bit=1
         =                       crc=1        finobt=1, sparse=1, rmapbt=0
         =                       reflink=1
data     =                       bsize=4096   blocks=1953506633, imaxpct=5
         =                       sunit=0      swidth=0 blks
naming   =version 2              bsize=4096   ascii-ci=0, ftype=1
log      =internal log           bsize=4096   blocks=521728, version=2
         =                       sectsz=4096  sunit=1 blks, lazy-count=1
realtime =none                   extsz=4096   blocks=0, rtextents=0

 

Any thoughts on this @dlandon ?

Haven't looked at this in a long time.  I'll have a look.