Night Rider

If you don't know what you're talking about, don't give advice. And I didn't crap on him, I told him to RTFM, since he had no clue what my question was even about, or the previous one from 4 years ago. And you, what does your response have to do with my situation? Why even reply? I swear, some people just like to post gibberish to increase their post counts. This isn't reddit. And to anyone in the future who is also curious about this, it worked great, go for it. And I am not holding anyone's hand...

You are incorrect. Disk fragmentation is not the same as parity file fragmentation. Parity fragmentation is caused by deleting files on the data drives, thus causing unused blocks in the parity file. It is reported during a status command which was implemented in 4.0 2013/9. Please refer to this post and this post. Actually, I'm gonna guess that is you, the same David, making the exact same comments in that old post? It seems to me like you've been giving inaccurate advice due to your misunderstanding...

Thank you for your reply. I clearly said "fragmentation". And clearly said "backup the content file and first parity disk". Basically taking them out of the equation until I have a new un-fragmented parity using the second parity disk. So I'm not sure what you mean. EDIT: And yes I understand that I will only be protected by a single parity until the last step, that is fine with me.

Thank you for your reply. I clearly said "fragmentation". And clearly said "backup the content file and first parity disk". Basically taking them out of the equation until I have a new un-fragmented parity using the second parity disk. So I'm not sure what you mean. EDIT: And yes I understand the I will only be protected by a single parity until the last step, that is fine with me.

Thank you for your reply. I clearly said "fragmentation". And clearly said "backup the content file and first parity disk". Basically taking them out of the equation until I have a new un-fragmented parity using the second parity disk. So I'm not sure what you mean.

DISCLAIMER: Question is could I do it, not should I do it. -R, --force-realloc In "sync" forces a full reallocation of files and rebuild of the parity. This option can be used to completely reallocate all the files removing the fragmentation, but reusing the hashes present in the content file to validate data. This option can be used only with "sync". WARNING! This option is for experts only, and it's highly recommended to not use it. You DO NOT have data protection during the "sync" operation. Has...

1) RTFM. 2) Don't use USB. If you have to use USB use mount-points so then Windows handles the unique identifiers. 3) Use Linux instead with UUID mounting. 4) RTFM 5) Use something else. Snapraid will not hold your hand in this situation because it's not responsible for the underlying filesystem, only the files that are on it. The filesystem is your responsibility. I used to use Windows with Snapraid + DriveBender, eventually got sick and tired of Windows' limitations and DriveBender's incompetent...

1) RTFM. 2) Don't use USB. If you have to use USB use mount-points so then Windows handles the unique identifiers. 3) Use Linux instead with UUID mounting. Snapraid will not hold your hand in this situation because it's not responsible for the underlying filesystem, only the files that are on it. The filesystem is your responsibility. I used to use Windows with Snapraid + DriveBender, eventually got sick and tired of Windows' limitations and DriveBender's incompetent developers and new owner. Switched...