Beiträge von siulman

  • Radarr and Sonarr both giving errors about mono version

    Zitat von ryecoaaron

    Personally, I would use docker for any of the file sharing services (plex and emby too) because it keeps the cruft out of your OS and keeps them in a jail to limit damage they could do to your system.


    All right, I'll do that.
    But... and maybe this is more a question for Docker guys, but how do I ensure updates on the docker pluggins? How do you "restart" processes when needed? I guess you restart the full docker plugin and that's all....


    Question: uninstalling the pluggins that I had in OMV is a clean process right? (i.e sonarr and transmission). No need to rebuild an entire omv system to have a real clean/lean baseline? :D

  • Radarr and Sonarr both giving errors about mono version

    Zitat von ryecoaaron

    Then something was done wrong because omv-extras should create the same entry that you added to sources.list but in a different file.

    If you remove it, you won't get updates. If you can't get it to work in omv-extras, just move the entry to its own file in /etc/apt/sources.list.d/

    Installing mono is not keeping things lean :) That is another benefit of using docker - your omv install isn't bloated by mono.


    Arf.... as usual you are making me change my mind on things I though I did well... lol
    So now I am thinking about restoring my clonezilla baseline, uninstall sonarr (yeah...it is in the baseline image) and then install docker with sonarr.
    If I follow that logic, I should also uninstall transmission an install it in docker right?


    What do you think?

  • Radarr and Sonarr both giving errors about mono version

    Zitat von ryecoaaron

    Docker consumes very little additional resources.

    I would never put any non-debian repos in /etc/apt/sources.list. Adding it as a custom repo in omv-extras should work just fine.
    Just to warn, sonarr will probably not have a plugin in OMV 4.x since the author thinks docker is the way to go.


    Well, adding it as a custom repo didn’t work for me and that’s why I added it to my souce.list. Is it better to remove it? I gues now Mono is updated I can safely remove it from my source.list and keep things lean as before?

  • Radarr and Sonarr both giving errors about mono version

    Zitat von ryecoaaron

    Other than I wish people wouldn't use the mono-project repos? I honestly don't remember. The mono packages are available in the Debian repos. Yes, they are older. If a program needs newer mono versions, I really think a docker is the best place to do that.

    Considering I wrote that post almost eight months ago and I haven't changed anything should tell you something :) I guarantee I won't be adding mono repos back to the list or changing anything other than minor minor things for the OMV 3.x version. I want to improve it for OMV 4.x but I don't have any good ideas yet.


    Ok...
    I like having the plugins (at least the stable and important ones) in the OMV system and not the docker container... I kind of think it's better to consolidate and have control of my services and it allows to upgrade when there is and upgrade, etc...But could be a psicological thing, I won't argue with you on this as you are the master ^^
    I tested in docker and works well, even if I am under the impression it's more resource consumming...


    That being said, I would like upgarade mono-project repos to have sonarr directly on OMV as I said. I will investigate further how to do it as apparently adding it to /apt/source.list does not work.... if you have any clue, appreciated.



    UPDATE:


    So I have followed this official debian procedure and worked well:
    http://www.mono-project.com/download/#download-lin-debian


    I hope I haven break anything else or compromised the OMV3 stability or future upgrades... In any case, Sonarr is not complaining anymore and my services seem ok.


    Do you think I should keep the mono repo in my source.list or should I delete it now that I have updated the version?

  • CPU wrong values?

    Zitat von jollyrogr

    I use WD red drives in my system too and was always getting emails about load average when doing a snapraid sync or scrub so I disabled notifications for load average.

    Thank you very much for this comment man!
    This comforts me!


    My 2 cents: WD Reds are disks made for NAS with low speed an power consumption (5400). So it’s not surprising the CPU is quicker and needs to wait for the disk...


    I just disabled the notifications too.

  • Radarr and Sonarr both giving errors about mono version

    Hi @ryecoaaron, sorry to bother you again, it's just I am still facing issues from the OMV2 upgrade... I am seeing this one is already identifyed.


    Could you tell us why adding the "mono" repo is not allowing us to "upgrade"?


    Quoting you:


    Zitat von ryecoaaron

    I need to re-work how external repos are added to omv-extras. My current method is hard to maintain. I will say that this problem comes up every time the Debian version OMV is using starts to get old. Apps not in the Debian repos don't stay on older libraries. That is also the problem with plugins that download the latest version.


    Temporarily, just add the mono-project repo to omv-extras as a custom repo. No need to use the command line.


    Did you have time to improve something?

  • CPU wrong values?

    Zitat von tkaiser

    Huh? Did you read what I wrote above and what my link tries to explain: Linux for whatever reasons adds the time a CPU spends on waiting for disks to 'average load'. So while this 'average load' is a pretty questionable concept in general on Linux it's highly misleading and should never be confused with CPU utilization.
    You still have a problem with %iowait but I can't tell you why. Just did a quick check on a much slower platform copying an empty file with 20GB in size to a 'linear' disk setup that consists of one USB3 pendrive (sda) and 3 SATA SSDs: https://pastebin.com/raw/LKbyZxcy


    As can be clearly seen %iowait only increases when the filesystem driver decides to write to the USB3 drive and even then those values are a lot lower than yours. In other words: I consider the high %iowait percentage on your system somewhat suspicious but that's all. At least there's nothing OMV could and should fix since Linux' concept of 'load average' is as it is. For reasons see http://www.brendangregg.com/bl…/linux-load-averages.html


    Ok! I get it now. I didn't get the "wait time" waiting for the disks was being added to the "average load". So nothing to worry then about my system and the CPU values that are not "real" if I may the term... and my CPU is definitly not struggeling with a simple CP... that's good, I was worried.


    Now concerning the disks... I can't belive there is a problem with the disks because I crossed the tests doing several copies from A to B, A to C, B to C, A to D, C to D, and it's impossible all my disks have problems...and in all the scenarios I had the %iowait increasing a lot. So I guess it's something else but if you don't know what could be, it's not gonna be me for sure... :)


    The thing is...this load average increasing is also happening when I use virtualbox (using my windows VM) for the same reasons I guess... is that impacting the perf?


    In any case I appreciate the explanations you provided today.

  • CPU wrong values?

    And last test...


    from sdc to sdb, different direction. They are both WD Red, same disks.


    What I still don't understand is the "CPU Usage" in the GUI that goes up when apparently it's ok on HTOP.... I am talking about the "CPU usage" green bar









    I've just received this e-mail. Could this explain something?




    This message was generated by the smartd daemon running on:

    host name: omv

    DNS domain: lupilan.com

    The following warning/error was logged by the smartd daemon:



    Device: /dev/disk/by-id/ata-WDC_WD30EFRX-68EUZN0_WD-WCC4N6LU7AA7 [SAT], ATA error count increased from 0 to 1



    Device info:

    WDC WD30EFRX-68EUZN0, S/N:WD-WCC4N6LU7AA7, WWN:5-0014ee-2b774c2c8, FW:82.00A82, 3.00 TB



    For details see host's SYSLOG.



    You can also use the smartctl utility for further investigation.

    Another message will be sent in 24 hours if the problem persists.




    ========================================================================================
    =========================================================================================



    Very last test in order to use different disks sda to sde1 (avoiding SC), the sympthoms are the same:



  • CPU wrong values?

    @tkaiser,


    Either sdf1 (hdd 2.5 usb3) or sdc (WD Red 3.5 SATA) are ok in terms of attribute 199. The value is 0 and not increasing. The copy was being done from sdf1 --> sdc.
    However, sdf1 seems to have some reallocated sector with a value of "16".This one does not seems to increase. I have already noticed it for a long time now.




    That being said, I redid the test from sda (SSD) to sdc (WD Red 3.5 Sata) again and see the difference, here are the results... That was even worse in CPU than before...Could that just be that the source disk is much more quicker than the destination disk so in some way the destination disk is not able to follow the speed...?



  • CPU wrong values?

    Zitat von tkaiser

    Sure, you confuse 'average load' with CPU utilization. Waiting for IO on Linux counts to average load for whatever reasons so you simply spotted a storage bottleneck.
    Easy to test:


    Code
    sudo apt install -f sysstat
sudo iostat 5

    You'll see high %iowait values and that's an indication for low performing storage and also the reason why average load increases when you do something IO related.


    Hello @tkaiser,


    thanks for your response.


    Could you then explain to me what is happening here please?
    I understand IOWait is high because my storage is causing some limitation (USB3 HDD 2.5), why? and why the CPU increases in GUI?
    I just re-did the CP command (on the bottom) I am affraid I am not familiar with this kind of data...



  • CPU wrong values?

    Hello guys,


    I just did a fresh install of omv3 and everytime I am doing small simple tasks like a "CP" or "Rsync", I am receiving e-mails from the system:
    Monit alert -- loadavg(5min) check succeeded [current loadavg(5min)=2.0] (this is from the screenshot below)


    I have a proliant g8 microserver, I know it's a Celeron but still...it shouldn't be so impacted by a "CP"... should it?


    The thing is... I have compared "htop" values with the values showed in GUI and they are not aligned...


    Can someone bring some clarity?


    I am wondering if I just disabled the “CPU alerting” e-mails when I was running OMV2 to avoid spamming... :-S



  • Transmission doesnt download torrents

    Zitat von doman18

    This is really pisses me off. I installed OMV recently and i have minor or major problems with almost every thing i want to setup. Now i have with transmission. It just doesnt download files. Heres my config. I added INPUT rule for my private tracker because it demands it and it works. But not sure should i add OUTPUT rule as well. Anyway this Ubuntu i downloaded from public tracker so it should download it anyway.



    //EDIT
    OK, i just made 777 permisions and redownloaded torrent and it works. I dont know which one of those two actually did the job but its working.


    You shouldn’t use 777, this allow every single user/group to read/write the folder. This is not a good practice. What you can do is change the group owner of your download folder for example by “debian-transmission” or even easier, add the “debian-transmission” user to the “users” group. Then you keep the “775” permission in the folder.


    Have some patience and will get it little by little. OMV is great, the difference with other tools is it’s full open, meaning sometimes you need to go in CLI to compensate the fact everything is allowed :)

  • Radarr and Sonarr both giving errors about mono version

    Hello,


    +1 with the same issue with Sonarr and fresh OMV3 install.


    I have added the new package in my /etc/apt/sources.list:


    Code
    deb http://download.mono-project.com/repo/debian jessie main
deb-src http://download.mono-project.com/repo/debian jessie main


    But then... when trying to update/upgrade from GUI, I get this error:




  • Can't start virtualbox on omv3

    Zitat von siulman

    Understood, so my primary system is clean, it’s just the MBR of my /dev/sda SSD. That’s curious....
    Maybe I can copy the content (virtualbox VMs) to a temporary folder of another hard drive, re-wipe it, and then re-copy the VMs? I am obssessed by having it clean... lol


    Quoting myself @ryecoaaron,


    I tried to wipe the MBR and the whole SDA1 disk but it didn't work. Then I even tried to physical disconnect the disk from the server and the "3.2.0" was still being showed up on the grub menu. I give up... I don't know where that thing comes from.

  • Can't start virtualbox on omv3

    Zitat von ryecoaaron

    Whatever wipe you did must have skipped the mbr. So update-grub is still picking up the old info. I wouldnt worry about it. doing something wrong would cause a lot
    more problems.

    Understood, so my primary system is clean, it’s just the MBR of my /dev/sda SSD. That’s curious....


    Maybe I can copy the content (virtualbox VMs) to a temporary folder of another hard drive, re-wipe it, and then re-copy the VMs? I am obssessed by having it clean... lol

  • SWAP partition needed when running OMV in USB Stick?

    Zitat von ryecoaaron

    If they are new usb sticks and you use the flashmemory plugin, they might be better.


    I’ve seen flash fail before smart would report
    it. So I dont waste my time with smart.

    Ok then, I am rolling back to usb stick with “flash memory” plugin as I have some of them at home and it would be easier and quicker to replace one 4G or 8G usb stick by another one 4G or 8G with clonezilla than replacing an HDD 2.5 150Gigs by an USB stick 4G/8G.


    I could even keep one “backup stick” plugged in, in case the primary fails just restore clonezilla to the other one with my ILO.

  • Can't start virtualbox on omv3

    Zitat von ryecoaaron

    ssd or usb stick doesnt matter. Has it ever been used as a linux/omv boot drive? grub says the other kernel is on sda1 and that is what the ssd is.

    Indeed!
    The SSD was my OMV drive before migrating to the HDD 2.5. I just decided to keep the SSD for virtualbox to optimize the performance of my VMs but I did wipe it before !!! How is it possible it kept the grub? How can I wipe this without wiping my virtualbox VMs now? :)

  • Can't start virtualbox on omv3

    Zitat von ryecoaaron

    According to your dpkg output above, the 3.2 kernel and headers are not installed on your system.


    Nop... the /dev/sda in an SSD drive plugged in my first sata slot just used as a “shared folder” dedicated to virtualbox VMs to take benefict from the quick disk.... it’s not an usb stick with an OS on it...