At this point, I'd contact SuperMicro. I don't think I applied any updates that would have affected the expander. But I guess that could be a difference. Mine is at 4.1 (0401)
Out of curiosity, what is the output of dmesg | grep ses0
[root@plexnas] ~# dmesg |grep ses0 ses0 at mpr0 bus 0 scbus0 target 20 lun 0 ses0: <LSI SAS3x28 0601> Fixed Enclosure Services SCSI-5 device ses0: Serial Number ses0: 1200.000MB/s transfers ses0: Command Queueing enabled ses0: SCSI-3 ENC Device ses0: da0,pass0: Element descriptor: 'Slot00' ses0: da0,pass0: SAS Device Slot Element: 1 Phys at Slot 0 ses0: phy 0: SATA device ses0: phy 0: parent 5003048001cc6ebf addr 5003048001cc6e80 ses0: da1,pass1: Element descriptor: 'Slot01' ses0: da1,pass1: SAS Device Slot Element: 1 Phys at Slot 1 ses0: phy 0: SATA device ses0: phy 0: parent 5003048001cc6ebf addr 5003048001cc6e81 ses0: da2,pass2: Element descriptor: 'Slot02' ses0: da2,pass2: SAS Device Slot Element: 1 Phys at Slot 2 ses0: phy 0: SATA device ses0: phy 0: parent 5003048001cc6ebf addr 5003048001cc6e82 ses0: da3,pass3: Element descriptor: 'Slot03' ses0: da3,pass3: SAS Device Slot Element: 1 Phys at Slot 3 ses0: phy 0: SATA device ses0: phy 0: parent 5003048001cc6ebf addr 5003048001cc6e83 ses0: da4,pass4: Element descriptor: 'Slot04' ses0: da4,pass4: SAS Device Slot Element: 1 Phys at Slot 4 ses0: phy 0: SATA device ses0: phy 0: parent 5003048001cc6ebf addr 5003048001cc6e84 ses0: da5,pass5: Element descriptor: 'Slot05' ses0: da5,pass5: SAS Device Slot Element: 1 Phys at Slot 5 ses0: phy 0: SATA device ses0: phy 0: parent 5003048001cc6ebf addr 5003048001cc6e85 ses0: da6,pass6: Element descriptor: 'Slot06' ses0: da6,pass6: SAS Device Slot Element: 1 Phys at Slot 6 ses0: phy 0: SATA device ses0: phy 0: parent 5003048001cc6ebf addr 5003048001cc6e86 ses0: da7,pass7: Element descriptor: 'Slot07' ses0: da7,pass7: SAS Device Slot Element: 1 Phys at Slot 7 ses0: phy 0: SATA device ses0: phy 0: parent 5003048001cc6ebf addr 5003048001cc6e87 ses0: da8,pass8: Element descriptor: 'Slot08' ses0: da8,pass8: SAS Device Slot Element: 1 Phys at Slot 8 ses0: phy 0: SATA device ses0: phy 0: parent 5003048001cc6ebf addr 5003048001cc6e88 ses0: da9,pass9: Element descriptor: 'Slot09' ses0: da9,pass9: SAS Device Slot Element: 1 Phys at Slot 9 ses0: phy 0: SATA device ses0: phy 0: parent 5003048001cc6ebf addr 5003048001cc6e89 ses0: da10,pass10: Element descriptor: 'Slot10' ses0: da10,pass10: SAS Device Slot Element: 1 Phys at Slot 10 ses0: phy 0: SATA device ses0: phy 0: parent 5003048001cc6ebf addr 5003048001cc6e8a ses0: da11,pass11: Element descriptor: 'Slot11' ses0: da11,pass11: SAS Device Slot Element: 1 Phys at Slot 11 ses0: phy 0: SATA device ses0: phy 0: parent 5003048001cc6ebf addr 5003048001cc6e8b
Since you guys have SAS3008 on board... have either of you gotten SAS3IRCU to work in FreeNAS? I can get the UEFI version to work, but when I run it in FreeNAS it tells me there are no controllers found.
Supermicro have pretty good support, glad they shipped out a new BP. As an aside I know testing can be fun and educational, but why not pickup a TrueNAS box and avoid all this system integration rigmarole? Is the pricing that much better when you roll your own?
It does. In fact yours looks better than mine. My da10 and da11 devices aren't named and yours are. hmmmmm
I have both. I paid ~$70k for my TrueNAS and $15k for my FreeNAS. I also got 13 more TB useable and used 4 less u in my rackspace.Supermicro have pretty good support, glad they shipped out a new BP. As an aside I know testing can be fun and educational, but why not pickup a TrueNAS box and avoid all this system integration rigmarole? Is the pricing that much better when you roll your own?
My goal with "rolling my own" if far more than simply saving a few dollars on the cost of the hardware. You do save quite a bit when you buy a supermicro box and do it yourself, at least in my case. I have gotten quotes both for me personally and for the school where I work and frankly, being on a tight budget at the school (and not so tight on people time) doing it ourselves was a lot less expensive. With almost 100TB deployed (soon to be 140TB), the cost difference was almost ten thousand dollars and climbing.