@Danp said in Alternatives to Untangle:

What to do with the Dell SC440 server that is currently being used? Scrap it?

Definitely scrap it.

By default, traffic will pass between VLANs 1 & 2, unless you go into the firewall & add rules to deny traffic

@scottalanmiller said in Questions That the Amazon Alex Cannot Answer:

@JaredBusch said in Questions that the Amazon Echo can't answer.:

Retitle to "Alexa" as it is not restricted to the Echo.

Done, and tagged.

Spelled wrong.

@JaredBusch there is another project that took the PocketMine code and tried to run with it that I am looking at. Haven't had much time to dig into it today yet, though.

It was amazing that Scott found it so fast. I was on the Windows side of things. Inside Windows they were using the iSCSI initiator to connect to the FreeNAS. All the sudden Windows would just log a ton of iSCSI events and go down.

I looked up the events and most people resolved them by putting the iSCSI traffic on a separate NIC. This happened two days in a row at about the same time each day. I was looking at snapshot, backup, etc times when Scott found it in the FreeNAS logs.

@stess said in Do you remove native printers/fax when you deploy machines? Win7/Win10:

I just had a user who keep complaining that their print job won't print. They thought the printer is broken, or jammed... so they open the door (the wrong way) and broke the door hinge. It is holding with duct tape now.

It's probably a better idea to apply the duct tape to the user...

For me: Depends on the user. Skilled users keep them, others get an environment as simple as possible.

@Danp said in DirectvNow:

@brianlittlejohn Sling is supposed to be beta testing their cloud DVR product starting this month on Roku devices. From what I read, they will eventually expand it to include other devices.

Huh... if it's anything like Playstation Vue on Roku vs PS Vue on Amazon Fire TV, don't expect much.

@Dashrender said in Splitting Array for Hypervisor on Hyper-V:

@scottalanmiller said in Splitting Array for Hypervisor on Hyper-V:

@dafyre said in Splitting Array for Hypervisor on Hyper-V:

@Dashrender said in Splitting Array for Hypervisor on Hyper-V:

@JaredBusch said in Splitting Array for Hypervisor on Hyper-V:

@Dashrender said in Splitting Array for Hypervisor on Hyper-V:

@JaredBusch said in Splitting Array for Hypervisor on Hyper-V:

@Dashrender said in Splitting Array for Hypervisor on Hyper-V:

@JaredBusch said in Splitting Array for Hypervisor on Hyper-V:

@black3dynamite said in Splitting Array for Hypervisor on Hyper-V:

@JaredBusch
Configuring one big array and creating a partition for Hyper-V and another for the VMs is not common? Or keep the hypervisor and the VMs on one partition?

It is not common, because the most common RAID adapters out there do not have the functionality to create partitions on the RAID array. We had a thread on this subject not too long ago in fact. If someone could find it and link it that would be great.

It is definitely a nice way to handle it if you can have the array split logically prior to installing the hypervisor.

You can still split the array up at the hypervisor install level.

Would there be any benefit to a split at the adapter level versus inside the array as partitions?

6/halfdozen.

At the controller level, the readability of the data side is not dependant on the hypervisor side being bootable. You simply boot to a USB media or something and read you data. t is a failure mitigation concept to me.

Not something that is going to make day to day any different

Time out - what?

If I create a single array as most RAID controllers only allow - and present that to my installation of Hyper-V, Hyper-V (assuming it works like install Windows Server - and I have to assume this because I've only ever installed Hyper-V twice, and most recently 2 years ago) then Hyper-V will allow you to create two partitions before installation begins. Assuming you install Hyper-V install one of them and your VMs into the other - what prevents you from booting to your aforementioned bootable media and gaining access to the VMs?

Heck, even if you just left it as a single large partition, why wouldn't booting to your bootable media still grant you access to the data?

As i said, 6 of 1, half a dozen of the other... Most of the time what you said is true. but losing the system that created the logical partitioning can always have a chance to lose everything.

That is still true for doing it at the RAID controller. just the point is moved.

Again - WHAT!?!?! I don't think I've ever seen an OS issue cause a partition failure before.

This used to be a big issue in my family too. No idea why it happened, but it did, all the way up until the XP days... then it tapered off.

MS started working on storage stability a bit. It was pretty horrific for a long time.

Offline @dafyre mentioned it was in the DOS days, pre WIn9X mainly - but almost completely gone with XP.

that's probably why I didn't see it happen. I did start at a place with lots of Win3.11, but I guess we were lucky this just didn't happen to us.

And outside of my family, that never seemed to be a common occurrence with most other folks either.

@Francesco-Provino said in SMB - Greenfield scenario - Full cloud sync and backup:

@BRRABill said in SMB - Greenfield scenario - Full cloud sync and backup:

@dafyre said in SMB - Greenfield scenario - Full cloud sync and backup:

@BRRABill His point still remains in that you are covered if a rock falls on the building, but not if a fire burns down the entire city.

Is it often that a fire burns down an entire city?

I mean what are the risk chances of
a) a loss of the NAS (theft, building fire, building flood)
b) a whoel city burning down

The problem is they WILL forget to bring usb home, or throw the drive and ignore errors… really, what's wrong with a cloud backup in this scenario? Apart from the first upload, the changed data ratio will be very low, something like <100Mb/day.

If you're looking at a low daily change rage, then I'd definitely go with NextCloud + Backblaze.

Why does google put games on their site every now and again?

@DustinB3403 said in Firmware Update Warning on SuperMicro from FreeNAS:

@scottalanmiller said in Firmware Update Warning on SuperMicro from FreeNAS:

@DustinB3403 said in Firmware Update Warning on SuperMicro from FreeNAS:

Why are you using FreeNAS? Every conversation ever with someone asking should I use FreeNAS or something else for my storage device, @scottalanmiller has always had the same answer. Use CentOS, or purchase a Synology.

So where did this come up that you are on a FreeNAS box?

Because we support customers. That's how customers work.

Don't get offended, I was just asking.

Don't feel bad. @scottalanmiller hasn't had his coffee yet this morning.

@scottalanmiller

I didn't even watch that video yet, but just wanted to make a statement about that man's mustache. That alone might persuade me to use that product.

That's new to me. Posting a post about Octoblu itself now.

@dafyre said in Can You Install FreeNAS to a Single RAID 6 RAIDZ2 Array:

Who are you and what have you done with @scottalanmiller ... Actually using FreeNAS for something?

I was just about to say the same thing. Or maybe his account was hacked.

Congrats on being employable again though.
Must be a nice feeling to have that option back.

@fuznutz04 @Reid-Cooper I'm logged in as the admin, never logged in as otherwise on this phone.

@scottalanmiller said in Installing MongoDB 3.2 on CentOS 7:

Just tested and deployed to CentOS 7.2 on Linode.

This failed me, so I went to the mongo docs and the baseurl contains the variable $releasever.

using that results in redhat//mongodb in the file, which is why I assume you hard coded that bit.

Escaping the $ fixes it.

cat > /etc/yum.repos.d/mongodb-org-3.2.repo <<EOF [mongodb-org-3.2] name=MongoDB Repository baseurl=https://repo.mongodb.org/yum/redhat/\$releasever/mongodb-org/3.2/x86_64/ gpgcheck=1 enabled=1 gpgkey=https://www.mongodb.org/static/pgp/server-3.2.asc EOF