Beta Tester Wanted (new Windows app for ReadyNAS)

emoacht wrote:
I will appreciate it if someone take time to test it and report the result with the name of ReadyNAS system. Also, any comments or suggestions will be welcomed.

Some time ago, I reported that my Pro Pioneer's CPU and System temperatures were swapped by NAS Herder -- CPU temperature was reported as "System" temperature, and System temperature was reported as "CPU" temperature (see my comments above from 26 and 27 January 2013).

Today I think I have found the reason:

In the RAIDar packets sent by the NAS, temperature values are identified only by number, not name. For example, here are the temperature-reporting portions of the RAIDAR packets from an Ultra 2 Plus and a Pro 6:

Ultra 2 Plus
temp!!1!!status=ok::descr=67.0C/152.6F::expected=0-80C/32-176F
temp!!2!!status=ok::descr=36.0C/96.8F::expected=0-65C/32-149F

Pro 6
temp!!1!!status=ok::descr=58.0C/136.4F::expected=0-65C/32-149F
temp!!2!!status=ok::descr=23.0C/73.4F::expected=0-85C/32-185F

Unfortunately, the numbering is not consistent across all products: For the Ultra 2 Plus, CPU temperature is temp1, but for the Pro 6 it is temp2. This information exists in the /frontview/conf/enclosure.db database, but it is not transmitted directly via the RAIDar protocol.

So NAS Herder must decide which temperature value is the CPU temperature. To do this, it looks at the "expected=" temperature range and assumes that the CPU's maximum expected temperature will be greater than the System's maximum temperature. In the examples above: For the Ultra 2 Plus, the CPU temperature is the one which is expected to be in the range [0-80C], not [0-65C]; for the Pro 6, the CPU temperature is the one which is expected to be in the range [0-85C], not [0-65C]. So NAS Herder's algorithm works, at least on those two products.

But it fails on the Pro Pioneer because that product -- although it has the same hardware configuration as the Pro 6 -- has a different CPU. And the high end of the CPU's expected temperature range is lower than the high end of the System's expected temperature range. This is a Pro Pioneer in the same environment as the Pro 6 above:

Pro Pioneer
temp!!1!!status=ok::descr=58.0C/136.4F::expected=0-65C/32-149F
temp!!2!!status=ok::descr=22.5C/72.5F::expected=0-60C/32-140F

See? Temp2's expected high temperature is only 60C for the Pro Pioneer, not 85C as on the Pro 6. So NAS Herder mistakenly chooses Temp1 as the CPU temperature value for the Pro Pioneer.

The algorithm will fail for any product whose maximum expected CPU temperature is lower than the maximum expected System temperature.

This bug could be quickly worked around by providing a "swap CPU and System temps" checkbox in the NAS Herder settings... But of course a nicer fix would be for NAS Herder to do something like read the "model" string from the RAIDar packet and then automatically choose the correct temperature labels from a lookup table. Here is the information from enclosure.db:

Note1 - The four "rev" numbers appended to the names of some products in the list are, in order: PCB ID, Board Revision, System Revision, and VPD Version. I do not own any of those products, so I cannot say how that information is transmitted in the RAIDAR packets.
Note2 - Some of these products do not report all the temperature values that enclosure.db assigns to them. For example, the Pro Pioneer (which identifies as "ReadyNAS Pro" in the RAIDAR packet's "model" string) reports only two temperature values, SYS and CPU; the third temperature sensor, AUX, is disabled in that product.
Note3 - I have checked this list against enclosure.db and I believe that it is an accurate copy. I have verified that it accurately describes the labeling of the temperature sensors for the Ultra 2 Plus, the Pro Pioneer, and the Pro 6, but I do not own any of the other products so I am not able to verify it further.


• ReadyNAS Pro, ReadyNAS Ultra 6 Plus, ReadyNAS Pro 6
  
  1 = SYS
  2 = CPU
  3 = AUX


• ReadyNAS NVX, ReadyNAS 1500, ReadyNAS 2100 (rev -1,-1,-1,1), ReadyNAS 3200, ReadyNAS 4200 (rev -1,-1,-1,2)
  
  1 = SYS
  2 = CPU


• ReadyNAS 2100 (rev 1,2,2,1), ReadyNAS Ultra 4, ReadyNAS Ultra 4 Plus, ReadyNAS Pro 4, ReadyNAS Ultra 6, ReadyNAS Ultra 2, ReadyNAS Ultra 2 Plus, ReadyNAS Pro 2
  
  1 = CPU
  2 = SYS


• ReadyNAS 3100
  
  1 = SYS1
  2 = SYS2
  3 = CPU


• ReadyNAS 4200 (rev 1,2,3,1)
  
  1 = SYS
  2 = CPU
  3 = SYS2

V0.92
Scan shows:

xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx
RN104
192.168.1.104
model!!0!!mode=pro::descr=ReadyNAS 104::arch=x86
ReadyNASOS!!version=6.1.2,time=1378503409,arch=arm
66

Why arch=x86 ?? Or means this my PC ??

Hi guys. I am very sorry for not replying comments so long.
I have not noticed your comments until lately. The mail notification system of forum didn't work again. Now I understand I shouldn't count on it.

Masato, I don't know much about RAIDiator 5.xx. Shutdown function of NAS Herder emulates the shutdown from FrontView. So correct command string is necessary to perform it. If anyone tell me the command string, it might become possible.

zamboni, as you said, desktop gadget is, unfortunately, a dying technology. So no plan to make a gadget version. Regarding email notification, it would be possible. On the other hand, a ReadyNAS system has built-in email notification system. I think if a disk dies, it will be notifyed by the system itself. So it depends on necessity.

UteDohrs, a system of RAIDiator 6.xx seems to pretend to be x86 architecture even if it is actually arm based. It is interesting. Are there any difference of functions between x86 based and arm based especially on remote power on/off?

And fastfwd, yeah, you are comletely right. Current version of NAS Herder uses "expected" temperature range in responce of RAIDar Protocol to determine which item would be regarded as CPU. And as you described, it is not always true.

So, thanks to your information, I made a test version from verson 0.9.7. The algorithm to determine item of CPU is as follows:

Step 1: Use ReadyNAS model tabled based on enclosure.db. The model table will be saved in the same folder in csv format. You can edit the table from Settings Dialog -> Other tab -> "Change index type". Or you can directly edit the csv file. On closing Settings Dialog or restarting NAS Herder, new table will be reflected.

Step 2: If there is no information which matches the model name of current system, use the "expectred" temperature range as a fallback method.

I think this algorithm will cover the problem in principle. However, there are still a few problems:

Problem 1: Is there any clue in RAIDar Protocol to tell the revision of the systems like ReadyNAS 2100? Otherwise, it will be left to each user to manually edit the model table.

Problem 2: This is more essential. The enclosure.db inside a system of RAIDiator 4.xx has information only on the system of that version. It is quite natual but it means the same information on the system of 5.xx and 6.xx is necessary as well. Has anyone successfully retrieved the information already? I myself am going to get the system of 6.xx and so I will try it later though.

emoacht wrote:
thanks to your information, I made a test version from verson 0.9.7.

Thanks! I have downloaded the test version; I will try it tomorrow or this weekend.

emoacht, I have a Pioneer Pro and using your test version making the changes I can verify it reads the correct values, or at least it is now the same as frontview.

Thanks for this awesome utility. I installed Windows 7 twice just to get yahoo widgets to run correctly so I could use the raidar widget, its nice to see I won't have to do that going forward. :)

fastfwd wrote:
emoacht wrote: thanks to your information, I made a test version from verson 0.9.7. Thanks! I have downloaded the test version; I will try it tomorrow or this weekend.

Oops, I forgot to post an update here. I've been running version 0.9.7 for a few days now, and it seems to be working well. Thanks again for making this utility available.

Hail fastfwd and sander! Thanks for checking test version. It helps me a lot.

So, sander, your system is Pioneer Pro. The algorithm based on model table (Step 1) requires the model name included in RAIDar Protocol to match that in the table verbatim and Pioneer Pro is not in the table. Therefore, I think it is done by the fallback method (Step 2). So, it will be nice if I could add Pioneer Pro in the table. If you don't mind, could you paste response of RAIDar Protocol from "Show raw Response" in Scan Dialog? Details on the disks and volumes are not necessary. I need to know the exact model name there and description on "Temp" as well as the order of CPU SYS (and AUX?) in the FrontView.

By the way, I made a further test version which can show the toast notification (only on Windows 8 or 8.1) instead of balloon message. It can be enabled in Settings Dialog -> "Notification" tab -> "Notify by ...". If you are interesed, please try.

OK, emoacht, here is the output, I hope this helps.

<MAC ADDR>
Qubert
<IP ADDR>
temp!!1!!status=ok::descr=58.0C/136.4F::expected=0-65C/32-149F
temp!!2!!status=ok::descr=36.5C/97.7F::expected=0-60C/32-140F
fan!!2!!status=ok::descr=1985RPM::type=CPU
fan!!1!!status=ok::descr=1776RPM::type=SYS
ups!!1!!status=not_present::descr=Not present
volume!!1!!status=ok::descr=Volume C: RAID Level X2, Redundant; 8867 GB (79%) of 11105 GB used
disk!!1!!status=ok::descr=Channel 1: Hitachi HDS5C3030ALA630 2794 GB, 35C/95F
disk!!2!!status=ok::descr=Channel 2: Hitachi HDS5C3030ALA630 2794 GB, 37C/98F
disk!!3!!status=ok::descr=Channel 3: Hitachi HDS5C3030ALA630 2794 GB, 35C/95F
disk!!4!!status=ok::descr=Channel 4: Hitachi HDS5C3030ALA630 2794 GB, 36C/96F
disk!!5!!status=ok::descr=Channel 5: Hitachi HDS5C3030ALA630 2794 GB, 36C/96F
disk!!6!!status=ok::descr=Channel 6: Hitachi HDS5C3030ALA630 2794 GB, 34C/93F
model!!0!!mode=home::descr=ReadyNAS Pro::arch=x86
RAIDiator!!version=4.2.21,time=1338489604
66

Thanks, sander. Okay, Pioneer Pro seems to call itself "ReadyNAS Pro" internally and so it is the case that the model table (Step 1) surely works. And Fans... probably I should change the order of Fans depending of CPU or SYS. Thanks for that information as well.

And Fans... probably I should change the order of Fans depending of CPU or SYS.

I posted a further test version. It will make the Fan for CPU at the top if multiple Fans exist.