Still lovin the macvtaps

>>109792433
damn I have something similar but made with 2.5 drives pulled out of laptops and running over usb, it's super slow but it's just backup target since drives are so expensive now.

>>109791394
Nice

File: mfw.png (277 KB, 698x670)

277 KB PNG

I've been eyeing an Intel Arc A310 ECO on amazon, was originally $240, then suddenly it dropped to $140 with the drawback of having a 2 week delivery time (even with amazon prime) and it was the last one in stock

I jumped on it. I was worried that it would never ship because the listing was removed from amazon and the order tracking was just "ordered" for a week and a half. Just got an update, expected delivery on Sunday, thank fuck. Every listing on ebay is at least $150 more and some jokers list it for $400

>inb4 why
TL;DR: Low TDP, kubernetes sharedDevNum, Emby transcoding, and I'm going to make an attempt to run both Llama-Guard-3-1B (SYCL) and OBS (Xvfb for fake display) 24/7

>>109787917
>i fixed most issue with SMB settings on the client.
>mounting the smb share with "cache=loose" is a must.
>
>maybe some tunables on the truenas server, last one might be overkill for small files though.
>vfs.zfs.vdev.sync_write_min_active=10
>vfs.zfs.vdev.sync_write_max_active=10
>vfs.zfs.vdev.sync_read_min_active=10
>vfs.zfs.vdev.sync_read_max_active=10
>vfs.zfs.vdev.async_read_min_active=1
>vfs.zfs.vdev.async_read_max_active=1
>vfs.zfs.vdev.async_write_min_active=1
>vfs.zfs.vdev.async_write_max_active=10
>vfs.zfs.zfetch.max_distance 2147483648
>
>12 hdd's, one Z2 pool, this was mostly to get 10gbe speeds for large files, but i don't get significant slow down on small file folders.
>
>truenas forum retards kept saying get more vdevs.

What am I looking at anon?

File: X570D4U-1(L).jpg (417 KB, 1200x1000)

417 KB JPG

anyone else have the x570d4u? trying to switch from non-ecc to ecc ram and having issues. throws a bunch of ecc corrected errors in memtest, and when I try to down clock from the rated 3200mhz to 2993/2666 it won't boot at all. i'm within the return window for the new sticks but I'd like to try to get them to work before dealing with an exchange

5600x cpu and had no issues with the other non-ecc ram running at 3600mhz

File: IMG_6337.jpg (108 KB, 933x724)

108 KB JPG

>>109792433
I got a shitload of external drives lying around, and I don’t like buying new ones, as well as just having so many random stored things that can fail, so I’m considering getting a NAS.

>Why not just buy the most cheap, ghetto, used 4-bay NAS that I can find and run RAID5/RAID6 to prevent data loss?
>Is there really anything all that special about Synology, or is it just overpriced brand name with lots of handholding?
>Should I just get a mega-cheap home lab desktop instead and chuck several huge HDDs at it and set up RAID myself on that instead of buying a specifically tailored pre-made NAS device?

>>109793033
ECC RAM is a meme. Don't fall for it.

gay buttsex
in the butt
with dudes

>>109793422
It's really nice handholding tbf. I do enough IT at work so half the time I'll pick what's easy for home to avoid any setup

I have my main 1522+ as my main NAS and I'm using a second sff computer with 2 drives as the backup NAS running proxmox with the sata controller passed through to a VM running xpenology which is the Synology software. No issues here. It's an easy button

>>109793960
>ECC RAM is a meme
why does the wiki make such a big deal about using it with ZFS then?
should we just use BTRFS instead, or is ZFS without ECC RAM actually totally fine?

>>109792433
>i226-V NICs are bad for servers
can anyone explain this? how and why is it bad for servers

>>109794511
we've explained it a billion times, Intel fucked up the design and both windows and linux drivers cause it to drop connection due to a silicon-level green ethernet implementation flaw

>>109794538
which would you recommend over it? 2.5Gbps of course

>>109794488
ZFS doesn't need ECC RAM. The only reason people shill for it is because 'muh data bit flip'.

Think of it this way, does your NAS have ECC? Yes? That's so cool. But for what? You're not downloading anything on it. You only upload files to it.
Does your main PC have ECC ram? Probably not. So guess what, if the data you download off the internet does a magical bit flip when downloading it while it's in your RAM you won't be able to tell. Here's an example, lets say the files you wanted to download was a string of characters, 0 0 0 0 to make it simple. But it got a bit flipped in transit, now it's 0 0 1 0. Your non-ECC machine wont be able to tell that it happened. Then you upload that to your NAS. Your NAS will think the 0 0 1 0 is a regular file. And then you're fucked.
This is why checksum is important when transferring files, not ECC. The only time you would ever want ECC is if you're downloading a bunch of shit from the internet and it doesn't provide a hash to double check the integrity. But even then the chances of your data getting corrupted is close to 0.

There's also one other reason to get ECC, and that is if your server is running 24/7 for 10+ years. ECC keeps the machine stable, but even a single reboot ever 2-3 weeks is enough to stop it from crashing from a random bit flip.

>>109794488
Most of that stuff was oldschool rust with slow hardware. Not that big of a deal now unless you have critical data and no parallel stream.

>>109793960
>>109794584
zfs will literally destroy your data if a bit flips. why take the risk?

I'm not going to participate in this thread today. Sorry, guys.
Maybe next thread.

>>109794538
>we've explained it a billion times
Why isn't it in the thread starter then?

>>109794584
You don't "need" ECC RAM the same way that you don't "need" a mirror disk for your data.

Sure a mirror would prevent data loss, just like ECC would prevent data corruption if a bit flips during a scrub due to electrical noise from nearby rows, overheating or gamma rays, but you don't "need" it.

How important is your data anyways? Do you even need it?

>>109794996
>How important is your data anyways? Do you even need it?
This is the fallacy. Most people are using raid or backups with checksums. It doesn't matter what ram is doing when the power is out.

File: file.png (1.52 MB, 1774x887)

1.52 MB PNG

>Time for overdue replacement of rapidly dying 4TB #4
>Pulled the drive, brought it to work
>Get to run it through the scrap crusher BRRRRRR
>Work friend delivers new (used) 4TB at generous price
>Home, install replacement drive - no problems
>#4 still red
I pulled and shredded a perfectly good 2 year old 4TB. Yes, I label my drives, and the trays.

>>109794127
ive done this before but the only other IT guy ive met was a needy bratty pacific islander. I dont think he'd be that interested in my server rack, he wanted something else. I didnt do the sneedful, im not loose like that

>>109795053
>rapidly dying 4TB #4
what tells you it was rapidly dying?
a CLI command or what?

>>109795013
zfs uses ram to check your pools during a scrub...

>>109795053
I've experience this exact same issue - turns out the connection to the PSU was going bad.

>>109795053
never ever toss your old hardware
you label it "bad" and you put it on the shelf
this shit is tech 101

>>109795123
so scrub on a schedule and maintain your system

File: 20260911_212242.png (112 KB, 1018x767)

112 KB PNG

>>109793033
guys I think it's just a bad stick. stick 1 threw 4 ecc errors in 30 minutes, stick 2 hasn't thrown an error yet after 45 minutes. same slot same config. going to start rma tomorrow. idk why I was so stuck on the speed before testing each stick, stupid

>>109795152
if a bit flips in your ram during a scrub, zfs will treat that as bad data and write the wrong data back to disk, destroying your original data

so the frequency of scrubs means nothing in this regard

>>109795168
ZFS doesn't need 'ram'

>>109795122
DEVICESCAN -a -o on -S on -n standby,q -m your-email@example.com -M exec /usr/share/smartmontools/smartd-runner -s (S/../../7/02|L/../01/./04)

>>109795131
I wanted the BRRRRRRRRRR

>>109795168
that's not how zfs does a scrub....or even how i fixes a file....
like that example before, if your file is 0 0 0 0 and while during a scrub it turns to 0 0 1 0, zfs will mark that file as corrupted and attempt to fix it. but the file is already 0 0 0 0, it's just the data on the ram is showing 0 0 1 0. so even if zfs tries to fix the corrupted file to 0 0 0 0, it's already 0 0 0 0 on the disk and will do nothing.
retard

>>109792433
a reminder that these blue sata cables are not to spec

File: 1755053597512391.jpg (219 KB, 466x350)

219 KB JPG

bros, any recommendation for a firewall similar to pfSense that could run on arm devices?

>>109795477
ufw

File: 1761166200633047.gif (1.14 MB, 256x256)

1.14 MB GIF

>>109795493

>>109793422
I've had WD nas and I wouldn't recommend it. Synology is pretty good. You get a couple gigs of ram for services usually. Adguardhome, vaultwarden, Synology drive/photos. If you run a local LLM you can also host a UI portal from your nas and you can use it from any device

>>109794511
>>109794538
>>109794561
The I226-v/i225 is still used in the official hardware from both pfsense and OPNsense.
It leads me to believe that your alternative which is the realtek is still worse than the Intel.

Of course at this point everyone has an opinion about every modern NIC from Intel, Aquantia, etc everyone is hush-hush about the rtl1827 for now.

I've used every common NIC at this point. An i225 did give me issues but only needed a different cable and after that you couldn't tell me any different

>>109793422
first of all, can you shuck those drives or they're regular drives in external usb racks?
second, synology is great, but xpenology with a huge atx case is also great
third, dont cheap out but dont go too expensive either. a nice case with a nice hba card, or a used synology. that's what i would do.