At least four months, and possibly close to six.
If you prefer to fall on the “Mission Critical” side of things, the time to upgrade from major release N to N+1 is when N+2 is released. So, wait for Halfmoon to upgrade to Goldeye.
3 Likes
They’re less careful with statements on Reddit than here, but “everyone should upgrade” is more the vibe than an explicit statement. But it goes along with their calling the new release “stable” out of the gate.
We’ve tried that. For years, and nothing has changed. For myself, I’ve given up on hoping for any integrity from iX.
Morgan said (up-thread, I think) that .1 will be out this month, and they’ll be considering it for “general” status shortly thereafter. Whether that reflects the actual software status, their concern about the optics of not recommending a release for general use until the eve of the next release, a combination, or something else, is anybody’s guess.
1 Like
Upgrading for upgrading sake is not a good strategy.
I thought I’d actually get a true resume-where-we-left-off-on-interrupted-replication as promised in scale 24.04 or whatever it was, and it may yet happen.
Lately, I have been updating to hopefully get to work on a VM system that won’t need to be rebuilt over and over as the underlying incus / libvert / whatever gaggle of subsystems gets juggled around. We were promised enterprise-ready VMs with this release, IIRC.
I discovered just how limited containers are and how much better jailmaker seems to serve my needs in general when it comes to things like automating the pull and distribution of SSL certificates, for example.
Etc. there is a reason some folk never tinker with their NAS again after they set it up. It should just work.
Yet, yesterday I had to reboot my canary in the coal mine SMB1 NTLM Sonos pi-based file server since even restarting SMB denied its juicy files to our Sonos system. Then it just worked again.
2 Likes
This thread has gone far beyond the scope of the announcement related to the specific release. Announcement threads should be reserved for feedback and discussion on the release, rather than a broader, more general topic. If you have topics that are beyond this limited scope, please create a thread in the relevant forum section.
2 Likes
Yes.. 25.10.1 is expected next week. As with all major updates, it includes many fixes and goes through another round of testing. That is currently in process.
After its release, we start to get bug reports. We track the number and severity of those reports vs the number of deployed systems. After 10,000+ systems have deployed for a while, we have a reasonable measure of the quality vs previous version (25.04). (Note: there is nothing preventing 25.10.0 from being called “General”… we just make a judgement call.)
If we find major issues that may impact many users when updating… we will not declare it as “General”. This process is much more reliable than our own internal testing assessment. We will then do a hot patch or resolve the issues in the next major update.
If issues are minor or only impact a small number of users, we will document the issues and then promote to “General”. It typically takes 3-4 weeks to feel confident and understand the most severe bugs and their workarounds.
For “Mission Critical”, the criteria is higher in that we ensure that larger and HA systems are also seeing trouble-free updates. These systems update later in the lifecycle and so quality cannot be assessed until later.
Obviously, the goal is to continuously improve quality, but otherwise there’s a balance of new features and bug fixes. Early adopters who want the latest features help find the bugs before the “General” user. “General” users battle test the software for “Mission Critical” users.
After this response, I’ll follow @ABain advice and stop commenting unless another General thread is started.
3 Likes
I did just make a little change to my truenas system 25.10.0.1 which should not have any impact, but it did!!
After removing a not used graphic board, the system did not boot any more. My kvm showed that the boot device could not be found ….
After that I did try to identify the problem cause and noticed two issues:
- drives connected via an USB-hub (among them the ‘boot pool’) where not recognized any longer
For the boot pool I solved that issue by directly connecting the sata-ssd connected via USB to a motherboard USB-port - My harddisks connected via SATA are not recognized any longer by TrueNas, they are recognized by the bios!!
So very strange … note that the reboot could be the first reboot after the 25.10.0.1 upgrade !!
What ever something not OK!! (note that the system used to run rock stable)!
That part however is odd - rolling back to previous boot version fix it it by chance? I have my own qualms with v25, but your system is colouring outside the lines of what is recommended therefor difficult to blame version update beyond doubt. Might be worth a separate thread.
A lot of recommendations are not just for ‘what will work’, but what will continue to work even if something goes wrong and/or maximize odds of recovery.
2 Likes
I’ve had an extremely lucky and stable experience so far for about 2 years with 3 different Truenas boxes, from enterprise level hardware (2nd hand) to home built stuff, it works flawlessly and I use it for multiple editors in a FCPX environment. I usually wait out the updates until we aren’t in critical jobs or until its been around a while but I signed up and added this here just to outline that for average Joe users it was not clear at all that 25.10.0.1 was an early adopter thing. It’s broken Final Cut libraries so can’t use the servers at all. Rather than roll back and risk loss I’ll just wait it out for now. It’s a great bit of software which I’d happily pay for within reason - first issue ever.
1 Like
Note that:
- I am using high quallity SATA-SSD’s and that the boot drive is OK! I do boot the system now with the boot drive directly connected to a motheboard USB-connection
- USB handling of the USB-hub is not working
- Harddisks as attached are recognised by the bios but not by TrueNas
- I did clear the bios, since I do have verdicts in the direction of interrupt handling. It not solve the problem
- Note that a modern consumer mainbord tend to have only four sata connections and no spare PCIE-slot to extend that with an extra sata controller, so the only possible option is to use USB !!
- The four available sata ports are used for the Z1 harddisk array
That’s not quite true. Even the most basic consumer boards mostly have at least one spare PCIe port and at least one M.2 PCIe port.
Still… the USB hub should be working. Do you see it when running lspci?
This thread is not a troubleshooting thread though. You should create an extra thread for this.
3 Likes
I did place the GPU back which solved the problem. Which is NOK of course …
Futher on you remark about pcie-slots is at least in my case not true. Note that I am using AMD-processors and related boards
- the number of PCIE-lanes is very limited and boy oh boy used so terribly stupid. In almost all boards 16 lanes are spend for the first pcie slot … so terribly stupid, since in most cases that is far more than you need for a graphic card where you desperately need the lanes for other purposes;
- I have two NVME’s slots where I need at least three: 1) and 2) in favor of a special vdev mirror and 3) as really fast drive in favor of VM;
- I need one pcie-16 slot in favor of a 10G-NIC-card
- I use one pcie-16 slot in favor of a low class GPU in favor of a VM
- I use a CPU with build in GPU needed as GPU in favor of TrueNAS
- PCIE-1 slots are not usable at all since, no serious card fits into a PCIE-1 slot and next to that they can not be used due to lane sharing
- the chipset is connected to the CPU with only four (pcie4-lanes)
So bot-um line AMD-CPU’s are great however AMD-motherboards are apart from a very limited exception not really good for server alike applications
Not that intel consumer boards are better
So I desperately try to work around these limitations, and the only options are using rare very expensive main boards and/or using USB
I don’t mean to sound presumptuous, but these limitations are ones you imposed on yourself when you chose consumer hardware to set up a server with objectives that aren’t exactly basic.
If budget is a concern (and i can totally understand can be a concern), just point to oldest gen 
6 Likes
My AMD NVMe build is fantastic. It does ot all. In hindsight I wish I thought about one more x4 pcie slot, but that was over a year of operation.
Take a look at my build for ideas in the future. One lesson I have learned, always plan your server build and do all you can to work out all the details in advace.
Fixed in 25.01.1… can you verify?
1 Like
Updated one of my 3 systems:
For me I still have the same result “Unsupported Volume Type” when attempting to open a library stored on the Truenas server.
To be clear Final Cut can use the footage stored on the server just fine if the Edit Library (Project files essentially) are stored on a local drive, then only accessing the raw files via SMB and truenas. But it will not live-edit on the server like it would before.
Note I haven’t changed any permissions or any other settings since commissioning this system, no need as its worked just fine.
1 Like
This should be its own thread. Briefly though, 25.10.1 introduces a new Final Cut Pro preset for SMB shares. You have to enable that preset for a share to benefit from it.
1 Like
I want to like truenas but they take every opportunity to disappoint customers (paying enterprise customers and community:free beta tester customers)
There are those who want to help support the project by beta testing and help resolve bugs. Then there are those who want stable appliance. I don’t see the problem with this approach. Users have the ability to select stable updates only. Not sure how that is disappointing customers.
3 Likes
It is an easy fix that would take 5 mins.., make this page match the downloads page or vice versa and what is in the UI of TrueNAS, consistency is always best vs confusing your users.
We all appreciate the free community version and many of us don’t mind testing earlier releases, but having this different wording is miss-leading as others already noted.
VS
2 Likes
Is there a Fix for Intel Dual X520 SFP+ Nics? Was not able to see any fix in release notes.