Docker Image for unRaid

[Fuzzy]

Originally Posted by jmv

Folks,

I am considering my options for the migration to v9. This weekend I plan to install over my SageTVserver 7 instance that runs natively on my Windows Server 2012 R2 system. Longer term I'm considering how to get to the V9 Linux route to allow for the larger java heap. I already posted about running V9 Linux as a VM on my Windows 2012 R2 server and that seems like a viable path.

Now I am looking into unRaid, but have a specific desire to use an older Areca card under unRaid...does anyone know if I can let the Areca card manage the raid array and just expose it as a single data drive to the unRaid OS? Are there any issues with # ports or expanding the RAID 6 array and unRaid "seeing" the increased capacity? For more details, see my post here:

https://forums.lime-technology.com/t...-single-drive/

What is the reason for wanting to keep the hardware raid instead of using unRAID's parity protected pool? One issue I can think of, is I'm betting your current Array is formatted with NTFS. NTFS is not ideal for any linux system - there are a number of potential issues actually using an NTFS partition on most linux systems. I try to keep any NTFS partition read only, and only installed long enough to copy data off of it onto a proper linux file system (XFS, in the case of unRAID).

[stanger89]

Originally Posted by jmv

Now I am looking into unRaid, but have a specific desire to use an older Areca card under unRaid...does anyone know if I can let the Areca card manage the raid array and just expose it as a single data drive to the unRaid OS? Are there any issues with # ports or expanding the RAID 6 array and unRaid "seeing" the increased capacity? For more details, see my post here:

https://forums.lime-technology.com/t...-single-drive/

Assuming unRAID can actually see the "drive", I don't see why it would be a problem. Of course you'd lose a lot of unRAID's status monitoring, like drive temperature and SMART (does it do smart? I think so.)

[Fuzzy]

It also would depend on the kernel having support for the Areca card. I'm not aware if it does or not, or if that card has a compatability mode, where it pretends to be a single drive attached to a standard SATA controller.

[jmv]

Thanks for the replies relative to using Areca in unRaid...to answer the "why" it is because I want the protection and speed of RAID 6. Unlike having a cache drive and a "slow" unRaid array, I would have 500MB/s plus Speed to the full array capacity. Also my Areca cards send me emails whenever there is an issue through the on card NIC, so I don't care about unRaid monitoring... I log directly into the Areca card if I want the details.

Also I think the Areca card offers an unformatted Disk to the OS, so I should be able to format it however is best for Linux/unRaid. I'm still most concerned about expanding the Array and how unRaid will react if the attached drive capacity suddenly grows...

[Fuzzy]

Originally Posted by jmv

Thanks for the replies relative to using Areca in unRaid...to answer the "why" it is because I want the protection and speed of RAID 6. Unlike having a cache drive and a "slow" unRaid array, I would have 500MB/s plus Speed to the full array capacity. Also my Areca cards send me emails whenever there is an issue through the on card NIC, so I don't care about unRaid monitoring... I log directly into the Areca card if I want the details.

Also I think the Areca card offers an unformatted Disk to the OS, so I should be able to format it however is best for Linux/unRaid. I'm still most concerned about expanding the Array and how unRaid will react if the attached drive capacity suddenly grows...

What are you intending to use the system for that you'd need that kind of speed? I ask, because aside from that, everything you just described you can get from unRAID itself. (plus, actually better protection, because if your RAID card goes out, you are out your entire array, until you replace it with a compatable (or identical) expensive card, while unRAID, the disks remain usable with any SATA port, and don't even need to be kept as a complete package, because each individual drive is readable on it's own.

[stuckless]

Originally Posted by jmv

Thanks for the replies relative to using Areca in unRaid...to answer the "why" it is because I want the protection and speed of RAID 6. Unlike having a cache drive and a "slow" unRaid array, I would have 500MB/s plus Speed to the full array capacity. Also my Areca cards send me emails whenever there is an issue through the on card NIC, so I don't care about unRaid monitoring... I log directly into the Areca card if I want the details.

Also I think the Areca card offers an unformatted Disk to the OS, so I should be able to format it however is best for Linux/unRaid. I'm still most concerned about expanding the Array and how unRaid will react if the attached drive capacity suddenly grows...

Then I guess the bigger question, to me... is why even got to unRAID at all... The Docker container can be started on any linux distro. unRAID provides a nicer web ui, but, if you are not using the Array capabilities of unRAID, i'd just do a standard linux install.

[jmv]

The speed is because I want to use it to backup my main file server. I have a 10Gbe network, so it can use the high speed between the server and the unRaid NAS...reason I'd go unRaid is because that seems to be the preferred SageTV Linux path and also a developer community for other dockers that might be beneficial in the future.

[coppit]

Has anyone noticed a sudden slowdown with the container? I'm getting half-second delays when selecting in the menu with my HD300, I can't play MKV files without fast-slow-fast-slow playback, and I get spinners in the menus pretty often.

I've uninstalled all plugins, and checked that my server has good bandwidth. I also checked my disks, in case one was going bad and slowing down.

I updated a couple of weeks ago to the latest container, and didn't really use SageTV for a while. So I thought maybe that was the change that caused this?

I'm downloading the java7 version to try that. (Docker hub is so slow these days...)

[EnterNoEscape]

Originally Posted by coppit

Has anyone noticed a sudden slowdown with the container? I'm getting half-second delays when selecting in the menu with my HD300, I can't play MKV files without fast-slow-fast-slow playback, and I get spinners in the menus pretty often.

I've uninstalled all plugins, and checked that my server has good bandwidth. I also checked my disks, in case one was going bad and slowing down.

I updated a couple of weeks ago to the latest container, and didn't really use SageTV for a while. So I thought maybe that was the change that caused this?

I'm downloading the java7 version to try that. (Docker hub is so slow these days...)

Are you on the latest version that just came out today (9.1.1) or are you saying it has been like this for the past week?

Edit: Also you should make sure you do not have any failing drives. Sometimes they will cause things to randomly freeze for a while.

[coppit]

I was on the latest version after a container restart. But it started happening a week or two ago. Unraid isn't reporting any issues with the drives, and a diskspeed run showed the same speeds as always.

I tried downgrading to 9.0.14.568, and I still have the same problem.

I tried my windows client, and it runs fine. But it's a VM running on the same machine. So I guess it's possible that there could be a network problem between the server and the HD300.

As I mentioned, bandwidth tests from the server to the internet seemed okay -- around 4-6 Mbps up and down. So even though VM and docker and unraid traffic all go out the same NIC, it seems to handle it okay.

I guess maybe my HD300 is going on the fritz? I'll leave it unplugged tonight to see if that helps.

[stuckless]

Originally Posted by coppit

I was on the latest version after a container restart. But it started happening a week or two ago. Unraid isn't reporting any issues with the drives, and a diskspeed run showed the same speeds as always.

I tried downgrading to 9.0.14.568, and I still have the same problem.

I tried my windows client, and it runs fine. But it's a VM running on the same machine. So I guess it's possible that there could be a network problem between the server and the HD300.

As I mentioned, bandwidth tests from the server to the internet seemed okay -- around 4-6 Mbps up and down. So even though VM and docker and unraid traffic all go out the same NIC, it seems to handle it okay.

I guess maybe my HD300 is going on the fritz? I'll leave it unplugged tonight to see if that helps.

I'm running the latest... and it's been fine for me. In the past, I've had a problem as you described, and it turned out to be a faulty port on my network work that was connected to my HD300. (I've actually had this happen twice... I now have 2 ports on my 8 port switch that are dead (as in they appear to work, but, when I use them, I get really sluggish connections). When this happened to me... I noticed it in the UI navigation, but I could play a video, but things like skip fwd/back would have 1-2 second lag.

[coppit]

Originally Posted by stuckless

it turned out to be a faulty port on my network

Thanks for that hint. It looks like my 16-port switch is dropping 10-15% of the packets. I plugged the important stuff into a smaller switch with 0% packet loss, and now things are zippy again.

[stuckless]

Originally Posted by coppit

Thanks for that hint. It looks like my 16-port switch is dropping 10-15% of the packets. I plugged the important stuff into a smaller switch with 0% packet loss, and now things are zippy again.

Glad you found it... lots of skeptical of the "faulty port"

[jmv]

Yeah...yet another faulty switch causing SageTV performance issues. I have a switch in my attic that routinely starts to go bad...swap it and issues resolved. Need to get around to running sufficient cat 6 from basement to attic so I can forego the attic switch. Summer temps can hit 150F in there so the HW eventual goes. I was very surprised the first time I had a bad switch as they usually are set and forget devices.