bardsleyb

Yes it's enabled. I know its not writing directly to the array since I am copying the file directly to the disk share for the cache disk, and I can visibly see all the drives in the array are spun down doing nothing. It's really weird. I can read from any disk in the array and write to my windows NVME drive at gigabit. I just tested that with a 36 Gig file. But when I write that file back to the cache drive, it starts at 110-115MBps and holds that speed for about 6 gigs, and then drops down to about 24 Meg write speeds for the rest of that transfer to the Cache disk. It's a crucial MX 512 GB SSD. I have an LSI HBA flashed to IT mode, but my cache drive goes straight to the Motherboard SATA port. I have 10 ports on the motherboard, so in fact, most of the drives in the array don't have to use that LSI card, just a few of the spinning disks are. I am wondering if again, this is just an excuse to get new hardware, starting with that cache drive. I thought this might be something easy that I had missed as I have been away from the forums and unraid updates for a while and thought maybe something had changed that I missed. The array works so well, that I have not made any real changes or updates in quite a while. For example, my parents unraid that I manage has not been rebooted all year and has an uptime of 390 days and counting now. Even runs a windows VM that I use for remote management of the server itself.

Unfortunately turbo write and jumbo frames did not stop from throttling down after the first few gigs either. At this point I am debating throwing in an NVME and testing that instead of the SSD I am using for Cache now. Seems like an excuse to spend money to me......

I have had disk shares enabled for several years. I tried doing this today but the same problem happens. I don't move files from disk shares to user shares and vice versa so I'm understanding what's going on there. Thanks for the help. Writing a file directly to cache still drops the speed after the first 5 or 6 gigs. Not sure why. It has to be a stupid Windows thing I am missing.

I am not sure where else to post this, but i want to ensure that I am using best practice methods to ensure the speediest transfer speeds over Gigabit from my windows PC to the Array. Here is what I am seeing..... I start transfers of video files and anything after the first 6 or 7 gigs or so, slows down from 110MBps (Basically full gigabit plus a little overhead) to 24MBps for the rest of the transfer. I have the shares using cache drive which is a Crucial 512SSD that unload to the array of spinning disks each night. I am not certain why, when I have files that range in size from 10 to over 100GB in size, why it will start off really well, and then suddenly slow down instead of staying at Gigabit the entire way. As I move files this way it is kind of getting to be a problem now. I can see and verify the files are indeed writing to the cache disk in the array only, and I can see them if I go into the cache drive, that they are being added. I can see the parity disk and all other drives in the array are spun down also, which is good. I am a network engineer so I am wondering if there are some setting in the NIC on either the array or the windows PC that perhaps need to be played with in order to get better performance? Both machines are on the same network and are full gigabit so I really do not understand where the slowness is coming from. The Array seems to not be pegged on CPU used when I run HTOP via a telnet session and monitor it. I can see the process counter and nothing seems busy in there at all. I am doing these transfers by just \\tower\usershare\fold\file and dropping it that way. Is there another better method than this? I am really not certain if I am missing something and just need a sanity check here. I am running 6.8.3 BTW and can provide any logs if asked. I just think the array is not the issue here, but maybe a setting or checkbox somewhere? Like I'm running over a buffer or write cache somewhere?

Thanks a lot Squid. I have done as you suggested and the server is actually upgraded now and awaiting reboot. I will reboot it tomorrow when I arrive at the house. Thanks for all the help!

I will be headed to my parents home for turkey day and I am thinking on upgrading their unRaid server manually. I have not done it that way in quite awhile but I think in this case I will be forced to. I control this server remotely by a VM running on said server and using teamviewer, so normally if anything were to go wrong, I would need to enlist their help. But since I will be there this weekend I figured I would do it while I was there. When I am looking remote, I see they are running Unraid version 6.2.4. When I go into the plugin section and click check for updates, it just says no update for unraid. I know this is incorrect obviously, as my server at home is running the latest version just fine. For whatever reason, my folks server just doesn't see the update and cannot install and update automatically. Has anyone seen this issue before? Anything I should be ready for? I would like to spend most of my day eating turkey and watching Football, instead of fighting with this server if possible so I am trying to head off anything in advance if anyone has seen this issue before. I am going to look for the manual upgrade steps on the website so that I have that ready for tomorrow as well. I obviously don't want to lose any settings on dockers or VMs and IP settings of the server itself either so i would like to get it all correct.

Nice! Yeah then you would have your server answer as the default gateway for everything on your network and dropping that traffic because it doesn't know what to do with it. Not a good thing. Hey man, I am a network Engineer and I have tanked my home network more times than I care to count! I'm glad you got it fixed!

I found the wiki that you mentioned I think. https://lime-technology.com/wiki/Replace_A_Cache_Drive Will the array complain that its a smaller sized pool than before? Or if they don't get 2 SSDs and instead get just 1? I am wondering if I need to do a new config on the array, but if I do will I lose my VM and Docker information.

This sounds like a layer 2 loop to me. How many connections do you have on the back of your unraid box itself and how many of those are you using? If there are 2, unplug one of them and try again. Otherwise we will have to get into the settings on your VM as far as what you bridged to get it resolved. Something might be bridged in a way that is creating this loop. Something like that can easily take the whole network out. I see this in my job as a network Engineer quite often. Bane of my existence.

I apologize if this is already listed somewhere else, but I searched and did not find it. Here is what I want to do..... My parents have an UnRAID setup I made for them awhile back for Plex to run on docker and Blue Iris to run on a VM for their cameras and it has been working well over the years. At the time I used WD Purple 2TB drives in a 2 drive cache pool to hold their VMs and dockers and such. One of those 2 drives is now failing. I spoke to my folks about their options and explained SSD drives and they wish to use that instead. They don't want to buy the same 2TB size though in an SSD due to the very high price, but they don't mind a 1TB SSD pool. How can I shrink the 2TB dual Drive WD Purple Cache pool down to a 1TB dual SSD pool? I don't have more than about 780 GB or so used for the VDisk and docker stuff currently so the size of 1TB should not be an issue right? I just want to ensure I follow the right procedure so as to not lose their data on there or have to rebuild it all from scratch, cause that would take me hours.

Ignore my previous post. I pasted the line wrong and nested virtualization was not actually on. It is now and the virtual powers up without error now. Thank you for all the help! Issue is solved for me.

Still no luck.... Where should I be looking to fix this? Or is what I am wanting to do just out of the scope of what can be done? I don't need to pass anything through at all for this VM to run in VirtualBox. It's just going to be used for GNS3.

Yes that is exactly what I am needing. I have made the changes and will reboot the server as soon as I get home. I'll update with how it goes, thanks Jon.

I am trying to run GNS3 for my network engineer training. I am wanting to run GNS3 in virtualBox on my unraid VM. VirtualBox is saying "VT-x/AMD-V hardware acceleration is not available on your system. Your 64-bit guest will fail to detect a 64-bit CPU and will not be able to boot." How do I enable VT-x on the VM itself?

Thank you! I was hoping there was a way to kill the mover. I needed the commands for it. When I get home from work, if the mover is still running, it will have been running for around 48 hours or so by that time. It may be bad to kill the mover as the post suggests, but at this point, if I don't I will never be able to shut the array down cleanly to fix the Sonar docker that I cannot kill either. I am going to have to reboot my array in a messed up way more than likely anyhow, so I would like to kill as many things cleanly, before I do that, as I can. The mover is just going to be one of those things. I hope to only have the Sonar docker running at the time I hit the hard reset button. Since I cannot stop that docker to save my life I guess....