Alt-f 01RC4.1 Craches kompletly

[to...@tlec.se]

Just intalled the above on a -B1 unit.

During heavy file-transfers and re-syncing at the same time, it completely craches, with no other option than pulling the power.

When powered up again, SMB goes back to default, totally forgetting all settings done previously both in normal GUI and in SWAT.

Since the logs does not survives power-cycling, there is no way to tell what actually happened.

For me the current version of Alt-F is a complete no-go, and I have to revert to the original FW.

[to...@tlec.se]

Oh, and btw, its an DNS323

[snable snable]

Why do you do heavy file transfers and resyncingnatvthe same time?

Did you save your settings (yes you have to do this Manually(!))

Am Dienstag, 17. Mai 2016 schrieb :

Oh, and btw, its an DNS323

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Alt-F" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to alt-f+un...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/alt-f.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[to...@tlec.se]

Yes of course I've saved the settings.

Since it is set for RAID1, it shouldnt matter.

Den tisdag 17 maj 2016 kl. 07:01:19 UTC+2 skrev snable snable:

Why do you do heavy file transfers and resyncingnatvthe same time?

Did you save your settings (yes you have to do this Manually(!))

Am Dienstag, 17. Mai 2016 schrieb :

Oh, and btw, its an DNS323

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Alt-F" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to alt-f+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

[João Cardoso]

On Tuesday, 17 May 2016 06:14:12 UTC+1, tomas wrote:

Yes of course I've saved the settings.

Since it is set for RAID1, it shouldnt matter.

It matters, RAID just keeps disk data safe. Alt-F is not installed on disk, nor its settings (except for disk-installable packages)

And regarding resync: it uses a lot of memory, and the 323 only has 64MB of RAM memory. There are several programs and scripts in the net (and one published by me in this forum) that splits rsync working into several sequential tasks, precisely to lower its memory requirements.

What I think it happens is that rsync consumed main memory, then started using swap, and when swap exhausted the system crashed.

resync memory requirements increase linearly with the number of files.

Can you perform the same jobs, in the same conditions, using the vendor firmware? If you can't you shouldn't compare apples and oranges.