tuxbass

Thanks JorgeB, that was it. So looks like cable connectivity caused drive to be disabled, but to re-enable, it requires explicit action from the user.

Ah, didn't realize. Is this the way to re-sync the parity?

Been swapping power & data cables between the drives (including SATA ports on mobo side), and absolutely nothing has changed. Although I'm not seeing I/O errors for the drive in the syslog anymore. Also done an extended SMART test for the drive with no problems surfaced. Just some idiopathic failure? srvr-diagnostics-20240422-1003.zip

For a couple of weeks parity drive was getting UDMA CRC Error Count notifications which generally is harmless and potentially related to bad power and/or data connection. My cache drive (SSD) has been racking up those for a few years now with no problem. Now however parity is disabled with syslog full of read&write errors with parity being disabled. Is there still a chance this is a bad connection, or time for a drive change? Bit odd how quickly I'm going through WD Reds though. srvr-diagnostics-20240405-1141.zip

Truly thought I might be helpful here tracking down the possible cause of the problem affecting me, and just mentioned the UUOC and a different grep option - I personally don't know everything and oftentimes learn from others in similar manner. Didn't realize I'm doing something awful here. In my professional developer career I haven't reached the place where I ask "AI" (whatever that means) how to solve problems, I'll try to improve, sorry. Also wasn't aware this thread is essentially /r/Conservative where people get hurt over literally nothing, am sorry again. And it's really cool to slide into people's DMs and vaguely threaten them with reporting their horrible posts like mine. Just wanted to reiterate it's completely OK and I invite everyone to report such content.

Looking at source, isn't the problematic bit caused by $share_dev = basename($share)."/"; $files = shell_exec("cat /var/log/file.activity.log 2>/dev/null | grep ".escapeshellarg($share_dev)." i.e. we take basename of a share (resulting in "data" in my case) and then grep it through activity log; as the backup share node has "/data/" in event file path, those events get erroneously included? On an unrelated note - in this particular case there's no real need to escapeshellarg - can use grep's --fixed-strings option instead. Also, that is a great example of useless use of cat, why not directly grep the file?

There's a possible duplication under 'Share activity' tab: ** /mnt/user/backup ** Mar 25 05:19:00 OPEN => /mnt/disk1/backup/repo/config Mar 25 05:19:00 OPEN => /mnt/disk1/backup/repo/data/6/62605 Mar 25 05:19:00 OPEN => /mnt/disk1/backup/repo/data/6/62606 Mar 25 05:19:00 DELETE => /mnt/disk1/backup/repo/data/6/62605 ** /mnt/user/data ** Mar 25 05:18:56 OPEN => /mnt/disk1/backup/repo/data/6/62660 Mar 25 05:19:00 OPEN => /mnt/disk1/backup/repo/data/6/62605 Mar 25 05:19:00 OPEN => /mnt/disk1/backup/repo/data/6/62606 Mar 25 05:19:00 DELETE => /mnt/disk1/backup/repo/data/6/62605 Listing said shares: # ls -lt /mnt/user/data total 4.0K drwxrwxrwx 1 tuxbass users 92 Jul 24 2023 win-10-user-setting-backups drwxr-xr-x 1 tuxbass users 28 Aug 25 2022 media drwxr-xr-x 1 nobody users 158 Aug 5 2021 Documents drwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 Mar 4 2021 vm_backups drwxrwxrwx 1 tuxbass users 194 Aug 23 2020 win10-bt-drivers # ls -lt /mnt/user/backup/ total 0 drwx------ 1 root root 92 Mar 25 05:19 repo drwx------ 1 root root 32 Jul 12 2023 vms Note data share doesn't show any modifications as of late. The activity above is expected to be under the backup share alone. Any idea as to why above activity is listed also for /mnt/user/data share?

DNS images such as the bind9 usually ask to start the container in host network. This however is blocked by dnsmasq service used by KVM. What is odd is I've already been running bind (and VMs) for years, but only now stumbled upon this problem. 1. how is this possible I haven't been affected by this problem before? Haven't changed any settings, containers nor VMs in months, and this config (roughly speaking) is 6+ years old on my system. 2. what's the correct way to go about standing up bind9? Use br0 network instead of host and ask for its own static IP from the router? Running Unraid 6.12.6

Hence my question regarding installing Windows onto the unassigned m2 drive. Yup, which I tried to solve some few years back with no luck, and decided to just turn a blind eye on.

Yes, agreed. My point was - could the Windows installation in this dual-boot setup have caused it, or it's just a coincidence and I'm really looking at another drive failure here? The timing is just too close for a coincidence, in my experience.

I believe that is a red herring. The cache drive has been showing those errors for over a year now. Have tried changing the cables to no avail. It's not a show-stopper of an error so I've just learnt to live with it. Including diagnostics from ~ year ago when cache mounted just fine: tower-diagnostics-20220606-2221.zip

System has following drives: - 3x4TB HDDs (array) - 500GB SSD (cache, sdb) - 512GB unassigned nvme m.2 Installed Windows 11 directly onto the nvme and all looked fine. While in windows, the other drives weren't even listed in the 'My Computer' section, but I disabled SATA controller just in case. Now when I booted back into Unraid, the cache drive no longer mounts: 1477:Jul 26 15:58:52 srvr emhttpd: shcmd (42): mount -t xfs -o noatime,nouuid /dev/sdb1 /mnt/cache 1479:Jul 26 15:58:52 srvr kernel: XFS (sdb1): Mounting V5 Filesystem 1581:Jul 26 15:58:54 srvr root: mount: /mnt/cache: can't read superblock on /dev/sdb1. What gives? Is it just a coincidence or windows managed to write something on that drive? srvr-diagnostics-20230726-1603.zip

Amazing that docker is even capable of affecting the array in this manner. Another beautiful waterfall release 👏

Upgraded from 6.11.X, and got same error as this user when trying to start docker container that binds to port 443 on host: As with OP, I had to change 'HTTPS port' to some random value under Settings/ManagementAccess, although 'Use SSL/TLS' has always been set to No. Is this an intentional change or a regression?

Ha, fair question! Think I was confused about the interaction of webmin and bare bind9 and what the implications are. I just amended the config files manually and all's well. Thanks!