NLS

It is just a "follow" on that being a file. I use the path you propose for more than a year, so you do it also, don't worry about it.

But this is dead I think. The one working now is binhex-crafty-4.

That was a bad misquote. I wasn't the one I said that it is a risk, I said the opposite.

Not really. It depends how the open ports are handled.

You can definitely mathematically know if you can have a solution. You can calculate in advance, taking care of OS intricacies. All these things are documented. The process might get just a bit more complex, but that is why we use computers, right? Anyway, I am showing a "probable" way to go. Just that. Now about your PS. I have at times thought of "why bother, just let everything mix" etc. My take is that UNRAID's parity method (which is a type of RAID4), can have advantages to harness. Knowing (roughly) what is in every disk is an advantage in case disks die OVER the number your parities can save. If that (knock wood) ever happens I definitely prefer to know "I lost my MP3" or "I lost that piece of my emulation data" etc. instead of "I lost probably a piece of everything". It is of course a philosophical matter in the end. This also helps with local backups (I use that). I make sure that for things that are too important I daily sync some specific folders to two different disks (while using those disks also for other things). If I didn't care about all that, I might just use a "normal" RAID5 solution. Anyway, I hope all this discussion evolves to something interesting (a future plugin?)

Try this link? https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vSyL6hHkrzSQwik_tpBfTc_6cEMogKQAKzpB5YUkuimqnq8d92hbUUcXQeiWIU1Kfszrq7vKuDPvTld/pubhtml (else I need you PM me your gmail)

So I am thinking of REALLY merging my top level folders as much as I can (I have a whole plan) after years of spill-overs. You know what would take "unbalanced" to the next level? Really automatically make and handle a plan of shifts to arrive at planned "end shape". An unbalanced "2.0" would do it for a single folder. In other words "I want this folder" (which could be a full share, if it fits) "in this disk". But that destination disk has things that make it NOT fit. Then the user will be able to select folders in the destination that doesn't want touched (moved). Then the system will make a quick check if folder to move there + folders that user doesn't want to be touched, fit that disk. If they don't allow the user to modify locked folders or select different disk or whatever. If they fit, then supposed unbalanced 2.0 will decide the moves that need to be done OUT of the disk (keeping top levels "together" as much as possible) and in the end (OR IN SMALLER STEPS if there is not enough contiguous space - this is the whole point of needing such an app) reach the point where locked folders are still there, folder to be moved has moved there and everything that doesn't need to move out is still there and what needed to move out is on different disk (even on the source disk that the folder the user selected moved out of, that now has more space) as much kept together as possible. This would be magic. Let me give an example with three disks in a google sheet... https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1GApW5mRgftP0FmUmFbbsO-nsn0ZjohbIjvO6FJz-y_g/edit?usp=sharing Version 3.0 would make this for multiple folders (this in disk 1, that in disk 2, the other in disk 3 and so on) and make a whole plan of moves to reach that destination. Or even handle organized "spills" (like this in disk 1 and rest in disk 2... which would be "Videos" in the example). I can possibly help analyzing the logic (maybe pseudo-code, my original background includes development - but have it "semi-forgotten" over the years, working in different fields of IT).

Yes. On the other hand, getting support = getting lucky, when self hosting and open source. As for this container, no you are wrong. Last update was last summer (less than 6 months), which is "okayish" in my book. On other news, I was forced to delete my docker folder and reinstall everything (where everything = 42 containers ...) because a couple got messed up last night... Couldn't start, couldn't be removed... Even using portainer... Anyway.

Thanks - but no thanks. I moved to another that is self contained. That said, if I get more containers that need a stand-alone DB, I might revisit.

Guys I have the container for long time, update it regularly (when there is an update), but haven't run it for a couple of months. So now that I start it, I get 500 error. What died?

How do I get rid of it? It is KDEinaDocker. During update today, I noticed that it failed because "a container with the same name exists" (erm... duh!?). So I tried to start it afterwards, no go. Tried to remove it, no go! Even portainer cannot remove it! (but did rename it to KDEinaDocker-old) Also stopping docker service and restarting it, didn't help. Note my cache disk is zfs. What do I do?

I've been using UNRAID for years. I see that it is not installed. Anyway, using the direct URL also did nothing (!!!)... So I rebooted the server once more. I will try again from apps and see what happens: ...and yes... now I HAVE unbalanced and configured port and enabled it! Nice blue interface.

It was tha latest. In any case, now the problem changed. I rebooted the machine to see if this "already in progress" unstucks... ...and it DID unstuck! I clicked install... it said it installed fine. ...but it didn't. I couldn't find unbalanced in the plugins! So I go to apps and I see it still shows "install" (so it doesn't detect that it is installed). So I click "install" again... ...and it does nothing!!! (btw I noticed the new plugin uses a different port and that different port is not even configurable? So how does it know that there is no conflict???) Remember I use UNRAID for years and I have numerous plugins and containers and VMs on it. At this point I cannot reboot the server again, maybe within the weekend. Any ideas?

Well I cannot install, because I removed old plugin, it got removed fine, then I click to install "unbalanced" and it says "Installation already in progress" (which is not true)... Some flag is set somewhere? Some service shouldn't be running?