*** Motherboard Rating System ***

I see many posts here of people saying things like "this motherboard is working perfect" or "this motherboard is flawless" and similar statements.  My sense is that many times these statements are coming from new users and are not faimilar with all the ways to test out an unRAID array.  This is not a criticism at all, the informaiton and enthusiasm are grreat.  I was just trying to think of a way to better capture motherboad compatibility, and at the same time teach new users proper "care and feeding" of an unRAID array.  This is what I have come up with.

First a few areas where we've had issues with motherboard compatibility in the past.  Thinking through these helped me come up with the rating levels below.

1 - Users will frequently build parity but not check parity.  I equate this to buying a new DVD Burner, burning an important backup, and just putting it away for safe keeping without looking at it.  To know that parity built right, you have to check it.

2 - Some users have problems once they add disks to an array.  I remember one mysterious problem two different users in which their array worked great with 4 (I think) disks, but when they added one more disk the parity didn't check.  We eliminated all sorts of things leaving motherboard compatibility as the only remaining possibility.

3 - There can also be USB boot issues when you get to 10 or 12 drives.  Some motherboards require that you set up the USB as a forced floppy, others make you use a specific USB port.  Others just don't have a way to pick the USB drive for booting with so many drives.

4 - Some motherboards have some specific compatibility issues with certain versions of Linus / unRAID.  For some users, upgrading to the next release, creates compatibility issues.  A look through the syslog can sometimes give hints of problems to come (sometimes not).  Sometimes these issues are rather subtle, but ultimately cause lockups, performance issues, or parity check problems.  There are some boot options that can be employed, but these take time and effort to determine.

-----------------

Here are the three "levels" of unRAID compatibility verification that I am suggesting ...

1.  The first level should require at least 3 drives (limit of free license), should have successfully computed parity, and should have successfully checked parity.  A syslog should be posted to make sure there are no nasties that might point to compatibility issues.  (The syslog will also document parity check performance).

2.  The second level should be a user with at least 6 drives (limit of Plus license) that has run for a month without a power down, had a successful parity check at the beginning and end of the month.  A syslog should be posted here for that period.  During this period at least 10% of the array size should be copied to and from the array.

3.  The third level would be a user that has had 13+ drives (including a cache disk), that has run for two months without a power down, has successfully parity checked at least 3 times (start, middle, end) and has posted a good syslog foir that period.  During this period at least 15% of array size should be copied to and from the array.

The syslogs will provide some evidence of good functionality, and the running the parity checks will establish good habits going forward.  Those looking to make purchase decisions will have more to go on than a casual statement of it works perfect, and have some tires to kick in making an informed decision.

I think some sort of rating system would be a good idea.  The one you outlined it pretty good, the only problem i see is getting the boards that might be "fully supported" to that level.  I guess we could have a 1 star, 2 star, and 3 star level that would directly relate to your three levels.

I have been using an Abit AB9 Pro for almost 6 months now.  The first 2 or so were with the free version and the last 4ish have been with the Pro version.  I realize that the Abit board is well documented on here and we can probably get others to evaluate it but i only have 6 (soon to be 7) drives in my array.  I have 1 parity, 1 cache, and the remaining are data disks.

I have no problem running these tests on my Abit but i probably won't get a chance to do it until later this weekend.

I think i will go ahead and add a "Star Rating" column to the Hardware Compatibility page and if we decide to not go that way we can remove it later.

EDIT:  OK, i have the star rating column added in there and i have made it red colored text.  I figured we should make this stand out a little.  It would be even better if we could use actual stars (as in the graphic) to make it even more apparent.

This sounds good to me - I can see why you suggested this after posting a reply in my thread earlier today.

Maybe something should be added to some of the wiki pages as a post-install 'check' as although I followed the steps to install and then configure unRAID, I did not see anything to say to carry out a further check, plus to check syslogs - although some might say this is something one should do as a matter of course.

EDIT:  OK, i have the star rating column added in there and i have made it red colored text.  I figured we should make this stand out a little.  It would be even better if we could use actual stars (as in the graphic) to make it even more apparent.

This is great.  I am going to suggest a slight change of terminology, though.  "Star rating" sort of implies something is better than something else.  You could have an old motherboard that passes level 3 compatibility testing but only has 2 SATA ports and no PCI-e slots with 30 hour parity checks.  And another motherboard that has 10 SATA ports and 4 PCI-e slots that has only passed level 1 with 4 hour parity checks.  The first one is definitely not better.  It has just demonstrated compatibility to a greater degree.

I am trying to think of something short and sweet that says this.  How about "Verify Level", with check marks instead of stars?

If you really wanted to get fancy, each check mark could be hyperlinked to the forum post in which the user proved that level of compatibility.  PsyVision is the first one to demonstrate level 1 compatibility.  He should get one check for the ASUS M3N-HD motherboard with a hyperlink to here.

Agreed, with you on the change of terminology and the use of 'check marks'  linking each check mark back to the respective thread is also a good idea.

I will make the changes and see what i can do about getting PsyVision board on there.

While you're in there, might want to add the text that explains what the three levels are.

While you're in there, might want to add the text that explains what the three levels are.

Yup i will also do that… but i seem to be having trouble adding an image to the wiki.  I am very unfamiliar with how the whole wiki thing works exactly.  I can make changes and stuff to what is already there but i am still trying to learn how this all work.  Anyway, it you appear, unless i missed something, that tomm is the only one that is allowed to upload files.  I have this pretty nice green check mark i would like to use as the image but I can't seem to get it uploaded to the site.  Any pointers in the correct direction would be much appreciated.

Also, if you have some spare time bjp999 could you possibly make a list of the boards that meet certain levels and the links to the respective threads.  If you can do some of the leg work I will get it all put it the wiki.  If you just want to put it in a text file and let me know when you have some of them done, then i can give you my e-mail address and you can pass it off to me.

There were reports of people having trouble uploading files recently... maybe Tom's space allocation on the server has been exceeded?

There were reports of people having trouble uploading files recently... maybe Tom's space allocation on the server has been exceeded?

Yup, looks that way.  I have found the hex code for the check mark charcter and am just going to use that for now.  The only problem i am having now is removing the "arrow link image."  I think i am going to just deal with the "arrow characters for now and see what i can do later.

EDIT: I have added the relevant stuff to the Hardware Compatibility page.  I have some other stuff to do (stupid college midterms), but i will get back to updating the page as soon as I can.  If someone would be so kinda as to take the initiative and run the levels of verification on there boards that would be great.

I really like the little check mark AND the little link arrow next to it.  Another variation of the column title is Tested Level, shorter.  I agree with Brian that we don't want anything here that sounds like a rating, because I can see this backfiring somewhat, if few users participate in it.  Very good boards might not have any 'rating', whereas a slow and hard-to-find board with minimal features might have the highest 'rating', because of a very industrious user/tester.

I hope I'm not being pessimistic here, but the 'leg work' could be a problem, and limit the effectiveness of this effort.  Getting Wiki participation has not been easy, although it has improved a little lately (Big thanks prostuff1!).  May need a persuasive and persistent person here, to nudge/prod appropriate people into reporting testing levels.

As a person brings up their array there is a certain amount of "bragging rights" that go with posting success.  I am hoping that will be enough for people to at least get to Level1.  Level 1 is no more or less work than should be done for setting up an array, and will get people understanding the value of the parity check and know how to take a syslog.  Then if they load up their array and run a parity check a month later they are at Level2 (assuming they have 6 disks). 

Level3 will be reserved for people with big arrays.  This will be harder to get, but having a level 3 user will give a purchaser confidence that the motherboards is stable and supports a maxed out array.  They'll likely include the standard motherboards and maybe a few others, like the abit.  Not that many people have 13+ drives.  But I know that some motherboards have a problem around 12, so wanted to go one higher for this level.

But even Level3 is pretty easy to get if you have a big array.  I could have posted a syslog with my system up continuously for 4+ months running 4.3.3.  I may try to dig back through my saved syslogs to see if I have a syslog that I could post that demonstrates at least 2 months of use.  Otherwise, I'll have to start one!

I really like the little check mark AND the little link arrow next to it.  Another variation of the column title is Tested Level, shorter.  I agree with Brian that we don't want anything here that sounds like a rating, because I can see this backfiring somewhat, if few users participate in it.  Very good boards might not have any 'rating', whereas a slow and hard-to-find board with minimal features might have the highest 'rating', because of a very industrious user/tester.

 

I hope I'm not being pessimistic here, but the 'leg work' could be a problem, and limit the effectiveness of this effort.  Getting Wiki participation has not been easy, although it has improved a little lately (Big thanks prostuff1!).  May need a persuasive and persistent person here, to nudge/prod appropriate people into reporting testing levels.

Very good points RobJ.  I think you are probably right about renaming the column to "Tested Level."  That way there is no "confusion" or "backlash" if something was to happen.  We are after all just testing these different boards and making sure they work at certain "levels."

I understand that the leg work will be a little bit of a chore and I am more then willing to do some of it (and will once next week is over and midterms are behind me).  I realize that not everyone is going to participate but i think that if we mention to people what the levels are and "push" them to test there boards when one is added to Hardware list we can start building this up.

Ok well, i will see what I can do in my spare time this week and hopefully get to "nudging" people in the right direction.

Oh, and RobJ, its no trouble at all in helping with the wiki.  I am still new to it so i am trying to learn as i go.  Please feel free to edit and change anything that I do, especially my screw ups.  I saw that you were one of the only ones adding to the wiki so i figured i would lend a helping hand where and when i could.

I could do my board to level 1 and maybe level 2 later this year since I only have 4 drives on it right now. Next time I do a parity check I'll try to remember to capture the syslog. The ECS A740GM-M seems to be a dying board so is there much interest? Maybe it's the 740G chip that's being phased out. Newegg doesn't carry the ECS one anymore.

The AMD 740G/SB700 based boards are used by a bunch of people around here, with the Gigabyte GA-MA74GM-S2 being the most popular one but showing my board is OK doesn't qualify the other manufacturers ones.

Peter

I could do my board to level 1 and maybe level 2 later this year since I only have 4 drives on it right now. Next time I do a parity check I'll try to remember to capture the syslog. The ECS A740GM-M seems to be a dying board so is there much interest? Maybe it's the 740G chip that's being phased out. Newegg doesn't carry the ECS one anymore.

 

The AMD 740G/SB700 based boards are used by a bunch of people around here, with the Gigabyte GA-MA74GM-S2 being the most popular one but showing my board is OK doesn't qualify the other manufacturers ones.

 

Peter

 

Any board we can get tested, no matter how old, is a step in the right direction.  If you would be so kind as to test your board that would be great.  After you do so just create a new thread in here titled "motherboard name" testing. After you get that done please PM me (or add the required stuff to the wiki yourself) and i will add it to the wiki.

OK, for anyone wondering I have gone through the Hardware Compatibility page and have added links to the Manufacturers website for the specific board (or as close as i could get) and a link to Newegg (for price references and reviews).  I know the price will not be applicable for some overseas but i figured the Newegg link was better then nothing.  For some boards i could not find links on Newegg (maybe i did not search hard enough) but if someone can find a link then please add it after the manufacturers link.

So I guess all we need now is for people to start testing there boards!!  See my post above about getting the info into the wiki.