Ok so that makes sense when it comes to evacuating files into the pool from a drive designated as SSD. But let's take SSD Optimizer out of the equation.
If you initiate multiple transfers to DrivePool simultaneously, why wouldn't it route each one to a different drive? This is supposing the SSD Optimizer balancer is NOT in use.
Scenario:
-SSD Optimizer balancer is NOT enabled.
-You initiate a transfer from F:\, and independent locally installed drive in SERVER1 to a local pool P:\. It begins writing files to the drive in the pool with the most free space available, which as I understand is the default scheme.
-You initiate a second transfer from SERVER2 across the LAN to SERVER1's pool P:\. It begins copying files to the drive with the most free space, which is the same drive the first transfer is currently writing to.
In this scenario you now have two independent single-threaded copy operations happening, and contending for IO on the same drive, which in my experience is not ideal. Two simultaneous file transfers will usually take longer than two consecutive file transfers, not to mention the potential for added wear and tear as the write head has to jump around more to accommodate both writes.
So why doesn't DrivePool route these two independent transfers to separate drives? This wouldn't be "multi-threaded" as I understand the concept.
Consider this scenario where DrivePool isn't involved at all: suppose I have 4 separate hard drives (HDD1, HDD2, HDD3, HDD4). Using Windows File Explorer, if I copy a file from HDD1 to HDD2 and simultaneously copy a file from HDD3 to HDD4, both transfers progress at full speed and Windows tracks them in separate progress windows. In my opinion, this seems like something DrivePool should be able to manage, not to mention seems to be standard operating procedure for Drive Bender.