terrastrife

Members
  • Posts

    303
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Converted

  • Gender
    Undisclosed

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

terrastrife's Achievements

Contributor

Contributor (5/14)

1

Reputation

  1. I'm not sure when this started but recently I've noticed that my file moves are very weird. I am moving files between disk shares from a Windows 10 VM with the VirtIO drivers installed. The network activity seems to burst in an even manner, and the disk write also seems to do it but not in time with each other. Has UNRAID recently (the last few months) changed how it writes to the disk? It used to be a constant flatline of both network and disk usage. Thanks.
  2. Nevermind, not sure what happened but I just repeated the same steps a few more times this time leaving it on 1 core and 2GB RAM and it seems to have worked, so I edited it back to 3 cores and 4GB and it's still working.
  3. Rolled back UNRAID, deleted VM (because it wasn't possible to delete in 6.5 as the pages wouldn't load), updated to 6.5, created new VM, still having the same issue, one core is pegged at 100% even though there is no actual load in the VM. No additional plug ins, just UNRAID 6.5 itself.
  4. Hi I'm having an issue with the latest version of UNRAID 6.5, when I start my Windows 10 VM, one of the cores is pegged at 100%, but it's not Windows itself which is showing the usual 1-3% as normal but runs super super slow. If I shutdown and stop the VM the usage goes away, but I am unable to enter the VM Edit page, it just comes up blank. If I try to start it again I get various errors: Timed out during operation: cannot acquire state change lock (held by remoteDispatchDomainGetBlockInfo) Others too but I didn't copy them and now they aren't coming up >< If I roll back to UNRAID 6.3.5 the issue goes away, but now I am stuck as I use unassigned devices and that no longer works with the old version. Any help? Not sure what I need to attach for extra info.
  5. Hi there, just thought I'd reply to this with my resolution. I deleted and recreated the VM with identical settings using my existing VM disk and it seems to have worked itself out. Not sure what happened, but there you have it.
  6. Not sure what happened, came home tonight to find that the cores that my VM are assigned to pinned at 100% (viewed on Dashboard) after not being able to log into the VM. Didn't think much of it at the time, my unRAID had been up for over 3 months so it was time to update the OS and plug ins. I couldn't stop, so I had to force stop the VM before that however. Since the reboot, I've been unable to start the VM, the log after starting the VM is as follows: 2017-07-15 18:54:39.116+0000: starting up libvirt version: 2.4.0, qemu version: 2.7.1, hostname: KUROHOST LC_ALL=C PATH=/bin:/sbin:/usr/bin:/usr/sbin HOME=/ QEMU_AUDIO_DRV=none /usr/local/sbin/qemu -name \'guest=Windows 10,debug-threads=on\' -S -object \'secret,id=masterKey0,format=raw,file=/var/lib/libvirt/qemu/domain-7-Windows 10/master-key.aes\' -machine pc-i440fx-2.7,accel=kvm,usb=off,dump-guest-core=off,mem-merge=off -cpu host,hv_time,hv_relaxed,hv_vapic,hv_spinlocks=0x1fff,hv_vendor_id=none -drive file=/usr/share/qemu/ovmf-x64/OVMF_CODE-pure-efi.fd,if=pflash,format=raw,unit=0,readonly=on -drive file=/etc/libvirt/qemu/nvram/7946e10e-f6ab-0971-ad52-89d544a90048_VARS-pure-efi.fd,if=pflash,format=raw,unit=1 -m 2048 -realtime mlock=off -smp 1,sockets=1,cores=1,threads=1 -uuid 7946e10e-f6ab-0971-ad52-89d544a90048 -no-user-config -nodefaults -chardev \'socket,id=charmonitor,path=/var/lib/libvirt/qemu/domain-7-Windows 10/monitor.sock,server,nowait\' -mon chardev=charmonitor,id=monitor,mode=control -rtc base=localtime -no-hpet -no-shutdown -boot strict=on -device ich9-usb-ehci1,id=usb,bus=pci.0,addr=0x7.0x7 "); LC_ALL=C PATH=/bin:/sbin:/usr/bin:/usr/sbin HOME=/ QEMU_AUDIO_DRV=none /usr/local/sbin/qemu -name 'guest=Windows 10,debug-threads=on' -S -object 'secret,id=masterKey0,format=raw,file=/var/lib/libvirt/qemu/domain-7-Windows 10/master-key.aes' -machine pc-i440fx-2.7,accel=kvm,usb=off,dump-guest-core=off,mem-merge=off -cpu host,hv_time,hv_relaxed,hv_vapic,hv_spinlocks=0x1fff,hv_vendor_id=none -drive file=/usr/share/qemu/ovmf-x64/OVMF_CODE-pure-efi.fd,if=pflash,format=raw,unit=0,readonly=on -drive file=/etc/libvirt/qemu/nvram/7946e10e-f6ab-0971-ad52-89d544a90048_VARS-pure-efi.fd,if=pflash,format=raw,unit=1 -m 2048 -realtime mlock=off -smp 1,sockets=1,cores=1,threads=1 -uuid 7946e10e-f6ab-0971-ad52-89d544a90048 -no-user-config -nodefaults -chardev 'socket,id=charmonitor,path=/var/lib/libvirt/qemu/domain-7-Windows 10/monitor.sock,server,nowait' -mon chardev=charmonitor,id=monitor,mode=control -rtc base=localtime -no-hpet -no-shutdown -boot strict=on -device ich9-usb-ehci1,id=ait' -device virtserialport,bus=virtio-serial0.0,nr=1,chardev=charchannel0,id=channel0,name=org.qemu.guest_agent.0 -device usb-tablet,id=input0,bus=usb.0,port=1 -vnc 0.0.0.0:0,websocket=5700 -k en-us -device qxl-vga,id=video0,ram_size=67108864,vram_size=67108864,vram64_size_mb=0,vgamem_mb=16,max_outputs=1,bus=pci.0,addr=0x2 -device vfio-pci,host=00:1b.0,id=hostdev0,bus=pci.0,addr=0x6 -device virtio-balloon-pci,id=balloon0,bus=pci.0,addr=0x8 -msg timestamp=on Domain id=7 is tainted: high-privileges Domain id=7 is tainted: host-cpu char device redirected to /dev/pts/0 (label charserial0) On QEMU it just displays "Guest has not initialized the display (yet). The cores selected for the VM are pegged at 100%. That's as far as it gets. Any ideas?
  7. If you delete your mysql folder directly off the disks shares, there will be no mysql folder left for unRAID to share, so it wont. Easiest way to unshare stuff.
  8. This month marks the sad event when I retire my unRAID for tRAID.
  9. So I have a bunch of empty space, I'd like to remove more than one empty data disk at once and rebuild parity after new config, this should be fine yeah? The plan: remove two data disks and parity disk, replace parity with one of the remaining empty data disks hit new config and recreate parity. I can't work out a reason for why it wouldn't work so all green?
  10. Hi Joe, thanks for the quick reply. I had another crack at it just now after reading your reply (messing around isn't too much of an issue as the data isn't critical), this time starting the array with a missing disk then stopping it, forcing the disk to red ball. The Parity-Swap process now works as intended with the option available, and I've started the copy/expand/rebuild.
  11. Okay, I had a 2T disk blue ball, it's done it multiple times so I've gone to buy a replacement, however the new 3T is bigger than my 2T parity, so Main is suggesting to Parity-Swap, what exactly is this? If I power down and physically move Parity to the old blue ball and the new 3T to Parity, I get the same message, to try Parity-Swap. If I keep them as is, and swap then hit refresh on the Main page, I get too many disabled disks.
  12. Since those drives are looking for the starting sector at 64, and unRAID starts at 63, there will be alignment issues. No jumpers to correct this like the WD 4K Drives...actually the F4s are unusable if you consider write performance. See linked thread below. Correct i only store massive files, my average file size is over 1GB so its not a real issue for me, would be if you store lots of small stuff though. i suppose thats fine for me though, dunno about other ppl
  13. i suspect the issue with teh LP's firmware update is with your hardware, kind alike how SSDs required a lot of motherboards to be updated. I have 2 one on an nforce500 and another on the saslpmv8 both worked fine, no updates or anything. personally i would be going samsung F4EG's right about now. the only 4k drives that arent a hassle. they also do very fastr seqential writes (about 140MB/sec at teh start of the disk slowing down to about 90MB at the end) which combinend with a fast parity means your write speeds need no cache.
  14. If you are running an intel chipset you may have to increase the nb core voltage to get the PEG slots stable with cards that arent video cards.
  15. as no one has mentioned it, these drives are SLOW SLOW SLOOOOOOOW SLOW SLOW i cant help repeat that, they are SLOW, do not use it for parity, youll get about 25MB/sec whereas a Hitachi 7k will get you 50MB/sec.