Posts by FROMV

    Hi tom_tav,

    Please could you explain in an easier way what I have to do, I am sorry but my skills are poor. I have a mac and a server with omv. smb is very slow, especially in read mode. I cannot use my mac with beyond compare. My old laptop (window) is a thousand times faster than my new mac to compare folders on my server. Please could you help me?

    Do you suggest AFP for mac? or SMB?

    Thank you very much!

    Thanks you again. I am using -c. If rsync will not copy corrupted files to the destination, it is a really great news to me :). It is just an assumption or it is a real fact?

    Thank you Geaves, As you suggested I have installed scrutiny, in fact it is much easier to to read to me than SMART in OMV.

    I have read the link uploaded above and it seems to reflect what I see for my drivers (pictures attached).

    WD disks seems to be good. Seagate ironwolf seems to have some errors, but based on the article it should be not real errors. Please, could you confirm? Are my disks seagate in good shape for you?

    As general attitude that I need to keep, is there any way too see what file was corrupted, I am afraid that I could back up a corrupted file with rsync and so corrupt a good file in the back up hard disk.


    Thanks for the good news :)!!!!

    I have started to use SMART just from the last week. I just mounted the HDDs in SMART, I enabled it and I created scheduled tests. Are you checking the SMART by scheduled tests report or in logs->SMART. What exactly should I check? There are so many info in the reports that I cannot understand what I have to look at? What is you best strategy, once you see something which you do not like, do you replace the HDD and you drop it in the bin? I am sorry for all my questions but I would like to learn to make prevention and avoid to cry in the future, you know what I mean. I know that I always have the backups but I would like to be more active. Thanks for your kind patience!!!

    All right, I think the best option is to go with a simple mounted disk, in order to not lose too much space. I am planning to do the secono backup now and than with an external disk. If I really need to join the 2 disks in order to map only one partition (to make easier to find the files), I could still use mergerfs, isn't it?

    My only concern is the safety of the data, as for checksum, more reliability (if any), data integrity and protection from silent corruption that normal mounted disks do not have. Is this a critical aspect or is this just a fear of mine without any reason? I cannot understand this part.

    For the new docker point position I should have clear what to do. I think I can manage it without any issue.

    At the moment rsync is close to finish its job. I completed the backup from the raid to one 6 tb disk and I am running the second back up from the raid to the second 6tb disk. So I am close to wipe the 2 x 4tb disks.

    I would like to summarize to see if I understood properly what you kindly suggested:

    1) marge 6+4tb to use for data and marge 6+4tb for the backup

    2) In order to marge and manage this setup, I need to use snapraid and mergerfs

    3) Use rysinc to continue to back up the data

    Is snapraid a better solution than normal data disk + backup for the safety of the data and disks? For safety I mean checksum, more disk/data protection, more speed, more reliability, data integrity and protaction from silent corruption.

    Thank you one more time!!!

    Thank you!!! I use my server for media (photos and music and movies). Furthermore I keep software's and documents important for me. Documents are a lot as they are personal documents and work documents. At the moment I have 4 tb used. Furthermore I use a lot docker for my containers. One of my containers is qBittorrent to download files. I do not know if it is an important info but I have 16 gb of ECC ram. Thanks for the support!!

    ^^ thread too long or silly questions ^^

    To make shorter:

    Is snapraid to prefer to normal data disk and backup, considering checksum and scrubbing? Is it giving any advantage over the normal data disk and backup?

    Furthermore how parity space works? If I have 3 data disks of 6+4+4tb (14tb), is 6 tb of parity enough? The parity is like a backup or it take less space than normal backup with equal amount of data?


    Is snapraid to prefer to normal data disk and backup, considering checksum and scrubbing? Is it giving any advantage over the normal data disk and backup? It is something that I cannot understand.

    Furthermore how parity space works? If I have 3 data disks of 6+4+4tb (14tb), is 6 tb of parity enough? The parity is like a backup or it take less space than normal backup with equal amount of data?

    Hopefully my questions are not too silly.


    Dear OMV Community,

    Thanks to your help received in these last days, I understood that the RAID is not the way I have to go for my personal NAS and use. At the moment, I have 2 x 6 TB (just arrived, EXT4, just mounted in the OMV) and 2 x 4 TB (in RAID 1, which data I am copying to one drive of 6 TB). Once all the data from the RAID1 are transferred, I will remove the RAID 1 and I will mount the disks again. At the moment I still do not have any needs to pool the disks, as at the moment I have just 3.5 TB used.

    I am writing because I still have some doubt....I am reading and more I read and more I understand that I know less and less. My first plan was to create a data disk and backup with the 6tb pair and a data disk and backup with the 4tb pair. Now I have some doubt, maybe I can pool 6+4+4 and keep one 6tb for backup for important documents and files.

    Reading about snapraid and margerfs, there is something that I am not fully sure:

    1) Can I use snapraid without parity? Or it does not make any sense? I am asking because my real question is: does snapraid has some kind of advantage over the "normal" mounted disks? Advantage like checksum, more disk/data protection, more speed, more reliability... I could not understand from the snapraid site

    2) if sanpraid has some advantage over normal mounted disk, does it make any sense to to have one disk for data in snapraid and one normal disk for backup (just mounted)?

    3) Reading some example of snapraid (which I could misunderstood) I saw for example 3 disks of 6 tb for data and one disk of 6 tb for parity to restore the data in case any one of the three disks is gone? Did I understood well? How 6 tb of parity can restore any of 6tb data? If this is true, how big is the capacity of the data pool? 6+6+6=18tb?

    4) Should I use this command to format my disks: mkfs.ext4 -m 0 -T largefile4 -L LabelXYZ /dev/sdX1? I just create the EXT4 in OMV by GUI, something wrong with this?

    5) I still have enough space, so I do not need to merge disks and folder at the moment. However I was wondering if the problem with the disappeared directories in the sharefolders when using mergerfs is sorted out? Or still mounting MergerFS shares at startup by commenting out the AssertPathIsDirectory is the best solution?

    6) Where can I find this file to edit (to solve the disappeared shared directories issue)?

    7) Should I use mergerFS by GUI or from the SSH by command? Any disadvantage with GUI?

    My apologies for the long thread and too many questions. Hopefully you can find the time to read and help.

    Thank you Guys!!!

    Thank you so much for your sharing knowledges, I know, it can sound repetitive, but I really appreciate your help guys. I have learnt something today as well and it is a day well spent :)!!!

    1) The additional tool for checksum you are talking in point 1) is rysnc as for point 3), isn't it? Or were you advising anther solution which you prefer?

    2) For SMART monitoring I have just to enable and use the the one in OMV GUI, isn't it? No further action required?

    3) Reading the checksum in the rsync link you kindly shared, I am not sure I understood well, as it seems that the checksum is enabled before the first transfer. By the way if I understood well your advice, I should make the first transfer without the checksum enabled (rsync is doing a kind of checksum by default). Just when the transfer is fully finish I have to make a second scan with the checksum enabled. Is it correct?

    4) After the first copy should I keep the checksum enabled or do you suggest to switch it off after the the second run?

    5) From the instructions "Generating the checksums means that both sides will expend a lot of disk I/O reading all the data in the files in the transfer (and this is prior to any reading that will be done to transfer changed files), so this can slow things down significantly." Does it mean that the space will be reduced generating the checksum and the speed of my HDDs slowed down?

    6) In your experience, do you have any advice for the checksum? Always open to learn from you guys!


    Thank you.

    Indeed, rsnapshot is a very useful tool. Most probably I could save my job, as I have replaced with a corrupted file, but of course it was too late after 10 sec I copied the file :(.

    1) If I go for normal file system (1 disk for data and 1 disk for backup), do I have SMART monitor, power control and check/checksum tool available? (I have read all the RAQ of snapraid)?

    2) mergerfs is also for disk? Of course I can share the maim folder (an do all the files and folders inside), but does it have some advantage over UnionFS if I have to marge two or more disks?

    3) The new HDDs are arriving :), which one is the best method to copy all the files from RAID1 (4 TB) to the new disks? Is there any good tip to follow in order to check the integrity of the files? Essentially I mean if there is a way to stress less the HDD during the copy and keep or check the integrity of the files?

    Thank you again for the help!!

    Thank you so much to have found the time to answer to my questions and share links where I can find useful info, a lot appreciated -||-. I will try to understand better, as my ideas are still not clear enough.

    Honestly I decided to go with RAID because I did not have good knowledge (and still I do not have ahahah) and I thought it was the right thing to do with a server in order to access to the data quickly and with redundant data. I thought it was the only and best file system for a server. As I have to expand the capacity of my server now, I did some research and here I am with my doubts :). By the way something is sure, I will replace the RAID with a "normal" one (I do not know the technical nomenclature), if I need some pool in the future I could use the snapraid (still I have to read from your link).

    Before I start to read the links above, to better understand the direction to focus to, please could I ask further if the reason to mergerfs? as I cannot understand the utility to marge two or more folders, maybe because my folders are not so big in dimension.

    If I did not understood wrong, you are advice to start making two drives one for data and one for backup. Should I use rsync to backup the data I need to save?

    Cheers -||-

    Thank you very much for the confirmation.

    Actually, reading here and there, I understood that most probably it could be better for me going with to no raid and no pool and use rsync to create a backup. Or another option could be use UnionFS and Snapraid or no pool and MergeFS. I have to understand better as I am just learning and I must study more. Please could you explain me:

    1) Can I use snapraid to create a backup/copy instead than rsync. I mean, Is snapraid a substitute of rsync to backup data? Any disadvantage or advantage?

    2) Is snapraid or no pool fast as RAID0 or RAID1? Which one is better in my case?

    3) If I go for no pool or snapraid, should I choose EXT4 or BTRFF? Any disadvantage or advantage?

    4) If with UnionFS and snapraid I can create a copy/backup of the files, what option I have to copy/backup files in margeFS? Is Rsync an option?

    5) With MergeFS, UnionFS and snapraid, can I use HDDs with different capacity?

    I am sorry for all these questions and if I am doing some confusion, I just took info here and there and I am trying to connect in order to make the best choice for my server. If you have any advice on how I should proceed, I am ready to learn.

    Thank you!!

    Dear Community,

    I have a HP ProLiant microserver Gen8 and used two disks so far (4tb each). I decided to upgrade to four disks and now I have options with respect of RAID.

    Can I add another 2 disks in Raid 1 with a bigger HDD capacity (i.e 8 Tb each)? I would like to avoid to create a RIAD10 in order to have more space, always if I can have a RAID1 of 4tb (4tb + 4 tb) and a RAID of 8tb (8tb + 8 tb) in my ProLiant microserver Gen8 at the same time. Is there any disadvantage to have two RAID1 with different capacity?

    Thank you very much!