kmwoley

If it's helpful for folks, here's what it took for me to stop the WebGUI/nginx crashes and enabled tailnet access to my macvlan docker containers. Background: I'm on unraid version 6.12.4. I had (and have) Wireguard working great. I could reach my local network, all of my Docker containers (those with host networks and those with macvlan), etc. etc. In order to get the Tailscale plugin to work the same as Wireguard I had to make the following changes: 1) As advised in the release notes, I changed my macvlan network & Docker settings so that they use the eth0.X interfaces instead of the br0.X interfaces. To do this, you'll need to update your network configuration to disable bridging and update your Docker configuration to allow the host to access custom networks. This config will enable macvlan, but move the interface to eth0. I recommend stopping your array and making both changes at the same time; if you do that, it *should* automatically update all of your docker containers with the right config. I did it in two steps, which meant I had to go manually change the network config of all of my Docker containers to get them to restart. 2) As you'd expect, I needed to use the command line to advertise the routes I wanted my remotes to connect to: tailscale up --accept-routes --advertise-exit-node --advertise-routes=192.168.10.0/24,192.168.20.0/24,192.168.60.0/24 --accept-dns=false 3) In the Tailscale Plugin settings, I needed to set "Enable IP Forwarding" and "Unraid services listen on Tailscale IP" to Yes. 4) On the Tailscale WebUI Admin, configure the server to allow the subnet routing. The most important bit was step #1. Without it, I could not reach my Docker containers that were on their own IP addresses. And this change also appears to have solved the WebGUI crashing that others have reported. It's been stable now for 12 hours; I'll report back if I see a change. HTH

If you find yourself here because your MinIO container stopped being able to start on or around October 31st, it's likely because MinIO removed support for "Filesystem" backends and didn't provide an automatic upgrade/migration path: https://min.io/docs/minio/linux/operations/install-deploy-manage/deploy-minio-single-node-single-drive.html Looks like the only solution is to run a previous container version, stand up a new version simultaneously and copy your data/settings to a new MinIO deployment. Really annoyed by this. Off I go to recreate and duplicate a few TB of data...

@DanielWWS - it appears we have the exact same issue. I tried two different Coral USB devices. I tried plugging the Coral to an externally powered USB 3.0 hub. I never found a solution. If you do, please post!

Thanks for the help on this, but I didn't find a solution that worked. The closest I came was by trying an external, powered USB hub. I actually saw the TPU do some detection in Frigate for a moment... only to stop working shortly thereafter. I think I might have a defective device so I'm going to return it.

Yes, I'm using the original cable that came with the coral. How are you mapping the specific USB? $lsusb ... Bus 004 Device 002: ID 1a6e:089a Global Unichip Corp. ... In my case, would I map /dev/bus/usb/004/002 ? I don't know how to find, or cannot find, a specific /dev/tty* device for the coral.

My box has 3 USB devices - the USB stick for the OS, a zwave stick, and the Coral. The Coral is on the USB 3 hub. The other two devices are on a USB 2 hub. Interesting theory that it could be lack of power; my motherboard is very, very old and it wouldn't surprise me if there's some quirk there. My USB Coral is mapped via the default settings: /dev/bus/usb -> /dev/bus/usb My USB zwave stick is mapped in another container to the specific device: /dev/ttyACM0 -> /dev/ttyACM0 Any issue with those settings?

Hey folks - I'm trying to get Frigate setup with a Google Coral USB stick. Everything on the setup has gone well, except that the USB device is behaving strange. It appears to be connecting/disconnecting repeatedly. And it's awfully warm to the touch when it's not in use. It doesn't look like it's actually being used to detect anything, either. To make sure it's not an issue with the Coral, I've plugged the USB device into a Windows based system and have confirmed that it (1) doesn't get warm at idle and (2) works correctly following the Google getting started instructions. When trying to use the device on my Unraid box, I get these repeated errors in the log: ... Jun 9 00:02:39 lenny kernel: usb 4-2: LPM exit latency is zeroed, disabling LPM. Jun 9 00:03:29 lenny kernel: usb 4-2: reset SuperSpeed Gen 1 USB device number 3 using xhci_hcd Jun 9 00:03:29 lenny kernel: usb 4-2: LPM exit latency is zeroed, disabling LPM. Jun 9 00:04:19 lenny kernel: usb 4-2: reset SuperSpeed Gen 1 USB device number 3 using xhci_hcd ... And in Frigate, I get a corresponding set of repeated errors around the same time: ... detector.coral INFO : Starting detection process: 126 frigate.edgetpu INFO : Attempting to load TPU as usb frigate.edgetpu INFO : TPU found frigate.watchdog INFO : Detection appears to be stuck. Restarting detection process... root INFO : Waiting for detection process to exit gracefully... root INFO : Detection process didnt exit. Force killing... detector.coral INFO : Starting detection process: 136 frigate.edgetpu INFO : Attempting to load TPU as usb frigate.edgetpu INFO : TPU found frigate.watchdog INFO : Detection appears to be stuck. Restarting detection process... root INFO : Waiting for detection process to exit gracefully... frigate.watchdog INFO : Detection appears to be stuck. Restarting detection process... root INFO : Waiting for detection process to exit gracefully... root INFO : Detection process didnt exit. Force killing... detector.coral INFO : Starting detection process: 146 ... This feels more like an OS, USB, hardware issue than something specific to Frigate... can anyone help point me in the right direction to diagnose this? Thanks in advance.

I dislike this solution for a few reasons. The primary of which is that passing in the entire BT bus into a Docker container only works if it's running as privileged and on the host network IIRC. In my configuration, I run my containers in VLANs for network isolation, making it such that they can't access the Bluetooth devices. If the BT support were removed from the host OS, I'd then have to create/maintain a Docker container in a higher-permission config just to run a simple Bluetooth script. Feels like overkill to go in that direction to me. It's nice that there's multiple ways to do it so that if someone runs into a driver issue they need to work around, they can use Docker. But I don't think the host OS support necessitates the frequent/trivial OS updates that seem to be the desired reason to remove the support. TL;DR - I appreciate and use the native host OS support for bluetooth and would like to keep it.

Added bluez back in Thank you!

@dmacias I just upgraded to 6.7.2. Is there a reazon bluez would have disappeared from NerdPack? It was super useful. Thanks!

Thank you - super useful. I'm starting to do some dev on Unraid for a really basic project and needed to get `make` installed.

Does anyone know if DevPack is supported on 6.7.0+ ? I'm looking to get make installed but was hesitant to install DevPack given that it hasn't been updated in a while and the report above of issues. Thanks!

Thanks!

Thanks for your help. I kinda get it, but when looking at the disk usage before making these changes I would have also said that I had 31GB free. Am I interpreting that first `btrfs fi usage...` command wrong? How am I to know in the future when a balance operation is required before I "run out of space"? I ask because I'd like to write a cron job that warns me before I run out of space. Thanks again for the help.

Thanks for the pointer. After reading that thread, here's what I did... I'd appreciate if you could check my understanding and help me to know how to avoid this in the future. 1) Checked the space reported by btrfs... root@lenny:~# btrfs fi usage /mnt/cache Overall: Device size: 352.13GiB Device allocated: 238.48GiB Device unallocated: 113.64GiB Device missing: 0.00B Used: 182.85GiB Free (estimated): 84.24GiB (min: 84.24GiB) Data ratio: 2.00 Metadata ratio: 2.00 Global reserve: 376.52MiB (used: 0.00B) Data,RAID1: Size:118.21GiB, Used:90.79GiB /dev/sdb1 118.21GiB /dev/sdc1 118.21GiB Metadata,RAID1: Size:1.00GiB, Used:645.45MiB /dev/sdb1 1.00GiB /dev/sdc1 1.00GiB System,RAID1: Size:32.00MiB, Used:48.00KiB /dev/sdb1 32.00MiB /dev/sdc1 32.00MiB Unallocated: /dev/sdb1 113.64GiB /dev/sdc1 1.05MiB The way I read that, my RAID1 cache drives have 27.42GB free. Accept for that 1.05MB that's unallocated on /dev/sdc1 which I'm assuming is the problem... 2) I deleted some files off the drive(s) to make some space and ran the balance command as recommended: btrfs balance start -dusage=75 /mnt/cache That command completed with no errors. Afterwords, here's what free space is reported... root@lenny:/mnt/cache# btrfs fi usage /mnt/cache Overall: Device size: 352.13GiB Device allocated: 188.16GiB Device unallocated: 163.97GiB Device missing: 0.00B Used: 179.96GiB Free (estimated): 84.62GiB (min: 84.62GiB) Data ratio: 2.00 Metadata ratio: 2.00 Global reserve: 330.16MiB (used: 0.00B) Data,RAID1: Size:92.05GiB, Used:89.41GiB /dev/sdb1 92.05GiB /dev/sdc1 92.05GiB Metadata,RAID1: Size:2.00GiB, Used:585.58MiB /dev/sdb1 2.00GiB /dev/sdc1 2.00GiB System,RAID1: Size:32.00MiB, Used:32.00KiB /dev/sdb1 32.00MiB /dev/sdc1 32.00MiB Unallocated: /dev/sdb1 138.80GiB /dev/sdc1 25.16GiB So, my question is... how much free space on the cache do I actually have now? How do I report on it and monitor it so I can set up some alerts when it's getting close to being a problem in the future? Given the catastrophic nature of running out of cache space (i.e. my entire infrastructure ground to a halt), I can't rely on this system if this is going to happen without warning in the future. Any guidance would be helpful. Thanks!