NETGEAR is aware of a growing number of phone and online scams. To learn how to stay safe click here.
Forum Discussion
Solved
OS6 now works on x86 Legacy WARNING: NO NTGR SUPPORT!
Update: It is now unofficially possible using NTGR images to update legacy hardware to os6.X
See Post #3, for directions to install 6.2.1 on x86 Ultra and Pro Models. (ARM NOT SUPPORTED by this OS)
Be forewarned, this requires a SYSTEM WIPE and likely voids any warranty support from NTGR
Supported so far: pro 2/4/6, ultra 2/4/6, old pro / Pioneer Pro, 2100v2
Not Supported: NVX and 2100v1
Thanks go out to "HomeBrew Anonymous" for making this possible.
Update 2: A firmware image to downgrade back to 4.2.26 is now available. See this thread. While this downgrade should get you a working system again on the supported firmware, be forewarned this requires a SYSTEM WIPE and NetGear also does not provide support for this downgrade. If you have issues seek help on these forums.
Original Post/Gripes
I have been reading these forums since Monday's announcement and there has been a resounding "ooof" regarding the fact the Ultras and Pros are unsupported for future OS improvements.
To clear the air: it would appear Netgear will never support os6 on past hardware. I have almost come to grips with this, and at least they have been open and honest with their forward direction and aren't stringing us along. viewtopic.php?f=138&t=70131
The upside is our devices still work and are mostly stable and eventually we can upgrade to a new shell that has os6 support, but in the meantime our $500-1000 investment is unable to take advantage of modern features we all desire.
I don't think I can add a poll here at RN forums, but I would like to garner support for a 100% unsupported home brew of the os6 on Pro6 units.
If we get enough support perhaps a talented member(s) here would help release a homebrew of sorts.
The 3 main caveats are:
1. Netgear will never be held responsible/your warranty is void
2. A format is required (new FS and OS)
3. Data loss is highly possible
If you are still interested please post a reply to this thread.
mdgm and I have decided that its time to lock this thread. So please do post any new OS6 on Legacy issues on their own threads.
1,274 Replies
Replies have been turned off for this discussion
- Thanks Stephen
- Tony359,
It works OK...I only have 4GB of memory, but I was still able to hit 101MB/sec on transfers. The only think I did not like was FreeNAS did not have any sort of fan control built in that worked for the ReadyNAS so it always sounded like a jet engine in my office. OS6 purrs quietly :-) mangrove wrote: Hm, I can't check right now, went back to OS4 to verify that performance can be good and I'm thinking of trying my hand at a full Debian instead if things with OS6 doesn't improve very fast. But yeah, I verified +C on the iSCSI container file.
Also I'm looking for an easily understandable description of the workings of BTRFS while writing data. I'm wondering if writing many small blocks means multiple read/write operations over the array, triggering multiple seek/rotational latencies. If that is the case, there should be a huge difference between RAID1 and RAID5. But that would be a more general problem with MDRAID and BTRFS in many scenarios...
Nope, this wasn't it. Tried 6.1.6 yesterday, the problem is still there with a RAID1 -- in fact, it is even WORSE, giving 1.5MB/sec. So this is not related to BTRFS-on-RAID5, it's a pure BTRFS problem.- Hi all!
I have been reading more or less everything about this "upgrade" to OS6 and i am a bit confused.
With the addon file and the upgrade file will the RN do a factory reset and loose all data anyway?
I have over 9TB of data and its a pain to copy/restore......
Recommendations? - yes, you cannot update at the moment, you need to factory reset anyway.
StephenB wrote: It might be overly conservative, but It is working as designed. 3.2/4.5 = 71% used.
70%? If that's grounds for a warning, why in the world would someone consider a Readynas unit? A volume should be able to be filled to 90-100%, or else I could use that unusable storage in better ways, like making a RAID6 or RAID10 with a sane file system. To recap:
4x3TB = 12TB in RAID0
4x3TB = 9TB in RAID5 on all sane implementations in the world
4x3TB = 6,3TB in ReadyNAS-BTRFS-RAID5 (if respecting the 70% warning)
4x3TB = 6TB in RAID6
4x3TB = 6TB in RAID10
Why in the world of (multiple expletives) would I choose "slick, almost-working snapshots" over real redundancy? Only a crazy person would do that.
The underlying problem, of course, is that BTRFS has no real concept of "how much space is left":
https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php ... e_space.3F
Do note this quote:it is impossible to give an accurate estimate of the amount of free space on any btrfs filesystem
And because of BTRFS's extremely malign characteristics when the file system gets full, this warning has to be "overly conservative", indeed. But don't fret! These malign characteristics:will eventually be worked around properly
Wow! feelsgoodman.jpg considering that this hasn't been worked out yet after, like what, six years of development.mdgm wrote: Like any PC when the volume gets very full, performance may suffer.
This is so untrue it hurts. "Performance" doesn't suffer when a spinning disk is "very full"; fragmentation (and to some extent longer seeks + the following rotational latency) does that, and you can fill a volume (you know, DATA STORAGE, the thing a NAS is made for) without fragmenting it just fine. Then the only "performance" "suffering" is the difference in transfer rates between outer and inner zones, which is because of the physical properties of spinning disks with constant angular velocity. But, of course, as usual your #1 priority is to make NTGR look better.
In reality, this warning is because BTRFS behaves very badly when the file system is full, and you might be unable to even delete files. And this is what you get when you use beta file systems in production units.- (a) neither mdgm nor I work for netgear. We are users/customers just like you, so we have no vested interest in making "NTGR look better".
(b) the 70% threshold warning applies to all ReadyNAS, it was not added for OS6. The same alert is also given for the older OS4 products which run ext. AFAIK it was simply carried over from the old OS.
(c) While you can "fill a volume" without creating fragmentation, generally speaking very full volumes do become fragmented - which will impact performance as mdgm says.
What on earth are you talking about here? All those RAID modes are available in OS6.mangrove wrote: Why in the world of (multiple expletives) would I choose "slick, almost-working snapshots" over real redundancy? Only a crazy person would do that. tony359 wrote: yes, you cannot update at the moment, you need to factory reset anyway.
And that means loosing all data? .... sigh..... :-)- Was the threshold 70% on older products before warning about the volume getting full or was it 80%?
- I believe an 80% could be considered a safe limit for any Linux system. You can fill it up up to 101% if you want, but to have the best performance 80% is usually recommended. It's just a warning, they are telling you "you're running out of space" giving you plenty of time to decide the next stage, buy new HDD, plan an upgrade etc. etc. Can't see anything wrong with that.
Viper: yes unfortunately.
NETGEAR Academy
Boost your skills with the Netgear Academy - Get trained, certified and stay ahead with the latest Netgear technology!
Join Us!
