• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Frank1940 last won the day on April 20

Frank1940 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

79 Good

1 Follower

About Frank1940


  • Gender
  1. This is only true if the drives have similar read/write speeds. This is many times not true when someone has a fast modern high (data) density drives that are used for the initial build and the next one added is a recycled older low density drive with a slow spindle speed.
  2. I believe (now that I think more about it) that this situation (have a HPA partition on a parity disk) created enough problems that the developers of unRAID simply decided not to allow it to be assigned as parity if it has the HPA partition on it.
  3. You can also read here for the help file for the Linux hdparm command: You can also google "Use of hdparm to eliminate HPA" and find a number of articles on how to do the removal. EDIT the search returned this link:
  4. This problem doesn't crop very often any more. (Gigabyte finally defaulted the option which created it to 'off'.) As I recall, you only need to remove the HPA partition if you are going to use that drive as the parity drive. (The parity drive must be the largest drive on the array and that little partition will guarantee that it is not.) If I have the numbers correct for the data you posted, you are only losing about 1MB of storage from the drive due to that partition being there.
  5. IT has to be turn on. 'Settings" >>> "AFP" under 'Network Settings' header.
  6. Looking at what you posted up. Your load is 324 Watts! I would next suggest that you look up the spec's on your UPS and see what the runtime is at that load with NEW batteries. Then think about the age of those batteries. (Battery capacity drops steadily with age until it almost reaches ZERO.) (That "Run Time" number is almost never very accurate. Don't put much faith in it...) I also noticed that you have both the "Time left" and "Battery Level" set to 10 minutes and 10%. That is probably way too long and too a low percentage when the battery is a couple of years old. You first need to do the test that @jonathanm suggested. I would also suggest that you set the Time on Battery" to something like 30 seconds. The exact number on seconds something you should determine based on your experience in with your local Power Company. The reasoning is simple. In the most of the developed world, if the power is out longer than the value you set, it will be out for an extended period of time. Far longer than any reasonably priced UPS system can provide. You might as well bite the bullet and shutdown the server down quickly. At the same time, the period should be long enough to get you past those power dips, line issues, and power company controlled outages. (When I lived out the country, the power would go out an sunny summer afternoon day without a storm with three hundred miles for about 20 seconds. The only thing I can think was happening is that the line repair men were opening a line breaker so they could make the final connection to the high line under a "no power" condition.) One more possible issue. The Max Wattage rating on a UPS is a very hard limit and is an instantaneous maximum. If it is exceeded longer than a few milliseconds, the UPS invertor will do a hard shutdown! (This is done by the manufacturer to protect those switching transistors to reduce the warranty costs.) You might need to figure out what the peak load of this server is when everything powers up during the shutdown procedure.
  7. In my opinion, it might be just barely OK? That is a lot of reallocated sections for a disk with only 6500 hours on it. If you are really intent on using it, I would run at least two more preclear cycles on it. I would also select all of the parameters which would increase the time to run the tests. (You really want to give that disk every opportunity to fail BEFORE you put it into any array and load it up with data! And I would consider it to be a trash bin candidate if that count were to increase by even 1 sector.)
  8. Read through this part of the manual ; If you have further questions, follow @bonienl suggestion.
  9. Read through this section of the manual:
  10. Great Question. Unfortunately, I don't have the answer but I tend to suspect that they are not changed on the fly. It only takes a few minutes to reboot the system and that is what I do whenever I make a change of this type.
  11. Absolutely, Parity one is a simple calculation that can be done with a very simple single logical operator. Parity 2 is a complex matrix calculation that recent processor families have now included a special operator to speed up the process considerably. Slower CPU's will have significant longer parity check times (as well as any other operaation hat requires a parity calculation) without that operator. You can read here about this:
  12. Have you attempted to solve the problem from the Mac/Transmit end of the equation. Any developer who updates a ftp type package should be making sure that it will work properly with the any older protocol and/or ftp client. After all, there is no reason to suppose that the user (you, in this case) will be able to do anything at all about the client on the other end of the connection. If there is a reason it won't, then they should be providing warnings about the problem and its solution/workaround.
  13. Virtually all of the time, this type of corruption is a completely random event. It is as liable to happen the first time the server restarts (or reboots) or it could be the 100,000 time. That is why it took so long for someone to finally suggest that you try it...
  14. Try toggling the "Use cache Drive" setting to 'off', restart then array, and then toggle it back 'on'. IT looks like everything is set up properly. (At least for the Global settings and the one share that you showed.) This are perhaps some really stupid questions. You have checked to see that your don't have any issues with your cache drive. And do you actually have some files on the cache drive that need to be moved?
  15. Login on either the console or PuTTY session and type: ls -al /mnt/user You should see some thing like this: drwxrwxrwx 1 nobody users 4096 Aug 13 16:20 Media/ Note the the owner is "nobody" and the group is "users". As you go deep into the tree, these owner and group settings should consistent for all of the data files and directories in this section of the file system. Is this what you are finding?
Copyright © 2005-2017 Lime Technology, Inc. unRAIDĀ® is a registered trademark of Lime Technology, Inc.