9.10 is now in Nightlies testing

[jlpellet]

FYI Bug #14193: 9.10 Boot Partitions Cannot Be Deleted from GUI

• Author: john pellet

 

[jkh]

I don't have a machine where I can check the latest versions of 9.10 to see what's included, so let me ask: will you manage to pull in Samba 4.3.6 prior to releasing?

No. It's not - Samba is up to 4.3.4 in the ports collection.

 

[religiouslyconfused]

I saw the downloads for 9.10 and there seems to be a release version.

 

[niclas]

Will you be upgrading to 10.3-RELEASE in the coming weeks as it is released, or is FreeNAS 9.10 set to RC3 for the time being?

 

[mav@]

Will you be upgrading to 10.3-RELEASE in the coming weeks as it is released, or is FreeNAS 9.10 set to RC3 for the time being?

Yes, it is planned. But I can say for 99% sure that there will be no difference, since FreeBSD release engineers already closed patch receive window, so, unless something very critical is found, there won't be any.

 

[niclas]

Yes, it is planned. But I can say for 99% sure that there will be no difference, since FreeBSD release engineers already closed patch receive window, so, unless something very critical is found, there won't be any.

How will this affect the jail template? If I recreate all my plugins with 10.3-RC3, will I have to recreate them again to go to 10.3-RELEASE? This is less of a feature/bug concern and more of a OCD one. ;)

 

[mav@]

How will this affect the jail template? If I recreate all my plugins with 10.3-RC3, will I have to recreate them again to go to 10.3-RELEASE? This is less of a feature/bug concern and more of a OCD one. ;)

I don't know whether jail templates will be updated, not my area, may be. But FreeBSD guaranties binary compatibility within each stable branch, so any 10.x jail should perfectly work on any later 10.x host system.

 

[jkh]

How will this affect the jail template? If I recreate all my plugins with 10.3-RC3, will I have to recreate them again to go to 10.3-RELEASE? This is less of a feature/bug concern and more of a OCD one. ;)

Please read the announcement and release notes for FreeNAS 9.10-RELEASE - this specific topic is addressed in detail. Thanks.

 

[niclas]

Please read the announcement and release notes for FreeNAS 9.10-RELEASE - this specific topic is addressed in detail. Thanks.

I had already read the announcement, that's why I was asking.
If I was unclear, what I'm asking is. When FreeNAS update the FreeBSD base to 10.3-RELEASE, will the jail template also be updated to 10.3-RELEASE and if so will I need to remake all my jails again to get them to 10.3-RELEASE instead of 10.3-RC2?

Also, thanks for the great work on this amazing software.

 

[jkh]

When FreeNAS update the FreeBSD base to 10.3-RELEASE, will the jail template also be updated to 10.3-RELEASE and if so will I need to remake all my jails again to get them to 10.3-RELEASE instead of 10.3-RC2?

We're not going to update the jail templates again for 9.10, no - there's no need to. That FreeBSD branch is already frozen and we anticipate few, if any, relevant changes to be made to it.

 

[ElGusto]

Hello!

I just switched to 9.10 and I have occured some minor problems, yet:

1) The NIC wasn't getting it's IP from my router's static DHCP list anymore. I then noticed there wher two NICs no althrough the machine only got one physical NIC. I could solve the problem by manually deleting both NOC entired and then readding just one.

2) The bootloader (as some paths within FreeNAS system) has a weird name for the current version in GRUB now.
Before 9.10 (so with 9.3) it was:
FreeNAS (FreeNAS-9.3-STABLE-201602031011) - 2016-03-03 23:50
But now, with 9.10 it is:
FreeNAS (FreeNAS-d1851bb04ead848f18f828f8fd48bea) - 2016-03-23 23:29
So I think that something went wrong there? Could this mean a potential problem, for example with upcoming updates?

3) The version of the virtualbox jail template is still shown as VirtualBox-4.3.12 (URL: http://download.freenas.org/jails/9.2/x64/freenas-virtualbox-4.3.12.tgz). I deleted all my old jails before updating, so it should have been updated shouldn't it? How could I do a manual update instead? I don't understand the previuos post where you say there won't be any updates, because the starting post says there would be an update to the templates in 9.10. So which of both is right?

Thank you!

 

[Alan Latteri]

Does FreeNAS 9.10 have better support for the Intel X520 10gigE card, and LSI3008 SAS controller (mrsas driver)?

 

[mav@]

Does FreeNAS 9.10 have better support for the Intel X520 10gigE card, and LSI3008 SAS controller (mrsas driver)?

Intel NIC drivers were updated. LSI drivers are practically the same.

 

[pernils]

I have 2 boxes.

One freenas mini with 32 Gb memory and one old pc with just 8 Gb memory. On the old pc the smb folder browsing went from decent to bad after 9.10 upgrade. (Yes I now I should upgrade the memory)

Could someone confirm that upgrade from 9.3 to 9.10 will not deteriorate the folder browsing speed. We are talking about folder with 20k+ files .. and smb share.

The mini is the "main" box and to update and notice this and have to downgrade will be a bit annoying under working hours..

 

[cyberjock]

I have 2 boxes.

One freenas mini with 32 Gb memory and one old pc with just 8 Gb memory. On the old pc the smb folder browsing went from decent to bad after 9.10 upgrade. (Yes I now I should upgrade the memory)

Could someone confirm that upgrade from 9.3 to 9.10 will not deteriorate the folder browsing speed. We are talking about folder with 20k+ files .. and smb share.

The mini is the "main" box and to update and notice this and have to downgrade will be a bit annoying under working hours..

Sorry, answering the question is based on too many unknowns. I will tell you that an adequately resourced system should perform faster on 9.10 than on 9.3, with everything else being equal. That's about the best answer that can be given.

I'd say the real problem is your RAM on the old system. 8GB is the minimum, so you shouldn't expect great performance, so it's a really bad comparison to try to say that because "some bad behavior happened on the old PC" that "this bad behavior might happen on the Mini". You can't do the comparison because you're comparing a system that is well resourced with something that clearly is not. ;)

HTH

 

[pernils]

The question was asked in a hurry and looking back is a sparse about info.

The old box is the backup system so I don't care about the performance on that one.

The mini on other hand is the main storage of all design drawings. You just can't take a stock 9.3 installation and be happy about the folder browsing.
You must temper with auxiliary settings stated by anodos before you get the same as on a pure ms server.

So my concern if that "hack" have been closed due the samba version switch or will it still work. My first small test on my underpowered backup station seems to show that it will not work anymore.

The mini consist by 4 (WD red) 4tb drives in raid 10 configuration with 32 Gb ECC memory.

The CPU is always in idle mode. Just a few low spikes when doing replications task.

Around 10 users 1 GB network .. typical small company network..

 

[cyberjock]

The mini on other hand is the main storage of all design drawings. You just can't take a stock 9.3 installation and be happy about the folder browsing.
You must temper with auxiliary settings stated by anodos before you get the same as on a pure ms server.

I think you are referring to https://forums.freenas.org/index.php?threads/cifs-directory-browsing-slow-try-this.27751/ which I wrote.

That's also not entirely true. It depends on what you are using in the files and the configuration of your client systems. At home I have not had to really tweak anything, despite having directories with 100k+ files.

I don't know if the "hack" is still required or not. As I don't have a system exhibiting this bad behavior (and therefore didn't need to use these settings) I can't really say if it is still needed or not. The weird codepath that created the poor performance was supposed to be fixed in 10.x, but I'm not sure if that was 10.1, 10,2, or if it's even in FreeNAS(10.3 RC3 I believe). If you are having that issue it would be a useful datapoint to see if removing the settings does cause the issue to come back.

 

[pernils]

I think you are referring to https://forums.freenas.org/index.php?threads/cifs-directory-browsing-slow-try-this.27751/ which I wrote.

Credit to both of you.

Instead of asking I went ahead and made a real test with 9.10 on the mini. And I'm sad to say that It turned out to be the same as the other box was telling me. The time for folder browsing went from around 3 sec to 6 sec.
You see when you are using 3d cad software and make a product you constantly jump around in folders to retrieve your already made parts for your assembly. 3 sec don't seems as much.... but you will defiantly notice it after a days work.

The "hack" will not change the outcome of folder browsing experience.

So folder browsing went worse.

A test of copying 25k (RichCopy) files to my win7 client (SSD) took 8.03 sek for 9.3 .. for 9.10 it took 9.02.
The test should done more times but it kind of shows where it's leaning towards .. only 16 mb/s

Some other thing is the messages that start to fill up the "footer console" mDNSResponder mDNS_ADDDNSServer: Lock not held! bla bla ...failed to allocate port 5350 UDP ...


Seems that I'm stuck to use 9.3 or go back to MS.

 

[cyberjock]

Ironically, the company that I was working with that had problems with long directory listings also did 3d cad stuff. I've heard of this problem being particularly bad with 3d cad programs in particular from at least 2 or 3 other people. I'm really curious as to what weird 3d cad voodoo goes on in the background that makes those programs so problematic.

 

[pernils]

I'm really curious as to what weird 3d cad voodoo goes on in the background that makes those programs so problematic.

It don't have som much todo with the cad software in it self but instead it's how you use the file system when you are designing.

For my use case we have basically 5 folders with around 20k+ files in each.

asm // folder for assemblys
part // folder for mics parts
threads // folder for screw and nuts and that kind of stuff
drafts // folder with the 2d drafts
hydraulic // valves and manifolds etc


When I want to assembly a complete design I jump in and out on those folders for collecting parts.
Each time you change folder inside the cad software it automatically start to update the file list.

You will get annoyed pretty fast if it take 8-9 sec instead 2-3 sec for the update.

By the way... when I measure folder browsing I by jump around with the explorer and not with the cad software. The 3D cad will be even worse.

You can sort of getting around this by having 4-5 explorer pointing at each folder and use drag an drop from them instead.

ZFS brings lots f goodies to the table but if it perform worse that it counterparts on the familiar smb protocol ... it sort of loose it's strengths.
If I have to choose between performance (more like being able to work in decent pace) or data integrity I will choose performance in 7 days of the week. In the end it's not my data.

By this it was irritating to discover that the new samba version have closed the "hack" for having a decent browsing experience.
But on the other hand it can't just be and the 2-3 person you have headt of that have this "problem". It must be tons of user out there who also have the same experience. This is issue must belong to to all zfs installations.
My google wodoo sucks because I can't find so much about the subject.

For now I continue on the 9.3 train on the mini and will do some test with aio and what not on the backup box in 9.10.