mbc0

Members
  • Posts

    1118
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by mbc0

  1. Thanks for the response, I can confirm that the mover was not running as that runs at 2am and finished around 6-7 hours ago. Is there anything I can do to help diagnose this? Thank you
  2. Hi, My shares have disappeard right in front of me whilst using the server, I captured the diags right after it happened, I am not running the suspected faulty docker (tdarr) if someone could please let me know what is happening I would really appreciate it! unraid1-diagnostics-20200907-0955.zip
  3. should this move I carried out be writing to the cache drive anyway considering it is the same share?
  4. OK, can't believe this but me setting up a cache pool has coincided with an update from avast that has dropped my speeds to 230mb/s! I tried a transfer from VM to VM (unraid1 to unraid2) and speeds were spot on, looked through all my Windows programs and stopped them one by one and as soon as I stopped avast speeds are back to 1000mb/s So sorry to have wasted yours and anyone else's time but hope this helps someone else at some point!
  5. Hi, I have never changed that setting it is 0KB for all my shares
  6. I have also noticed other shares that use the cache drive are stopping as the cache is full. If a share is set to "use cache=yes" it used to write directly to the array, not stop?
  7. Hi, I am on the new beta if it makes a difference but having an issue moving data in the same share? I am moving from /mnt/user/Music/music to /mnt/user/Music/lidarr I thought this would be nearly instant but it has been moving from the share to the cache drive until it filled and then stopped?
  8. now not necassary as per Johnnie's last post, it appears that is normal for the new beta.
  9. BTRFS Yes, I have reduced the slots to 1
  10. I do but it is showing as a pool still instead of a cache drive (2nd screenshot is from my other server)
  11. Before I had a single cache drive and could copy from my Windows Desktop machine at 1000mb/s over my fibre connection, I wanted redundancy so created a cache pool to get only 230mb/s @johnnie.black suggested trying the beta which I installed, freshly formatted both NVME drives (which each are capable and tested at 3000mb/s and sustained a 1000mb/s speed when used as a single cache or unassigned device from my Windows Desktop) and still only get 230mb/s so to regain my speed I wanted to revert back to a single cache drive.
  12. I tried running 2XNVME 1TB Drives as a dual cache pool but suffered terrible performance (yes, tried beta and reformatted to new partition size) I would like to go back to a single cache drive to regain the performance but googling/faq does not cover this process only how to remove drives from a pool. I am currently left with 1 drive in the cache pool and still suffering poor performance.
  13. @johnnie.black I have removed the Samsung from the cache pool leaving a sole Sabrent Rocket but I am still only getting 230mb/s could this be due to the partition alignement? I can get 1000mb/s from this drive as an unassigned device or because unraid still thinks it is a pool rather than a single drive? is this prooving that the sabrent rocket is the problem here?
  14. OK, I can only presume it is because of the mix of Sabrent and Samsung If the below looks ok to you I will purchase another Sabrent to see if it makes a difference.
  15. OK, Thanks for that, So it is looking like BTRFS doesn't work for me on the latest beta so is that likely to be due to the Samsung Drive? I can purchase another Sabrent Rocket?
  16. Can anyone advise if I can safely change to an xfs pool please as BTRFS is too slow
  17. Hi, I upgraded from stable to the latest beta yesterday and noticed my CPU temps are higher than they were on Stable. I have checked CPU Temp when in the bios and it is 29-30 degrees c There are quite a few sensors to choose but the CPU one seems very high when the server is idle (no dockers/VM's running) Do I have the right sensor selected? Model: XCASE24 M/B: Gigabyte Technology Co., Ltd. X399 DESIGNARE EX-CF Version x.x - s/n: Default string BIOS: American Megatrends Inc. Version F12. Dated: 12/11/2019 CPU: AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2950X 16-Core @ 3500 MHz HVM: Enabled IOMMU: Enabled Cache: 1536 KiB, 8192 KiB, 32768 KiB Memory: 48 GiB DDR4 (max. installable capacity 512 GiB) Network: bond0: fault-tolerance (active-backup), mtu 9000 eth0: 10000 Mbps, full duplex, mtu 9000 Kernel: Linux 5.7.8-Unraid x86_64 OpenSSL: 1.1.1g
  18. Hi, I upgraded from stable to the latest beta yesterday and noticed my CPU temps are higher than they were on Stable. I have checked CPU Temp when in the bios and it is 29-30 degrees c There are quite a few sensors to choose but the CPU one seems very high when the server is idle (no dockers/VM's running) Do I have the right sensor selected? Model: XCASE24 M/B: Gigabyte Technology Co., Ltd. X399 DESIGNARE EX-CF Version x.x - s/n: Default string BIOS: American Megatrends Inc. Version F12. Dated: 12/11/2019 CPU: AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2950X 16-Core @ 3500 MHz HVM: Enabled IOMMU: Enabled Cache: 1536 KiB, 8192 KiB, 32768 KiB Memory: 48 GiB DDR4 (max. installable capacity 512 GiB) Network: bond0: fault-tolerance (active-backup), mtu 9000 eth0: 10000 Mbps, full duplex, mtu 9000 Kernel: Linux 5.7.8-Unraid x86_64 OpenSSL: 1.1.1g
  19. Hi, I have 2 NVME Drives both capable of 3000 mb/s write speed Samsung 970 EVO Plus 1TB Sabrent 1TB Rocket NVMe PCIe 1TB I could write to both of those individually at 1000 mb/s using my fibre connection from my Desktop Together as a BTRFS cache pool I am only getting 230 mb/s I have installed the latest beta, removed and reinstalled both nvme drives as a cache pool and reformatted to the MBR: 1MiB-aligned I have attached my diagnostics in case anyone can help please? unraid1-diagnostics-20200827-0900.zip
  20. @johnnie.black Just to update, I am now on the latest beta, removed both NVME Drives & Re-added formatting to MBR: 1MiB-aligned rebooted the server (just in case) but still only getting 230mb/s I will post this on the other thread you linked as it is obviously where it has all been discussed. Thanks