Jump to content
Covecube Inc.


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


vfsrecycle_kid last won the day on April 4 2017

vfsrecycle_kid had the most liked content!

About vfsrecycle_kid

  • Rank
  1. Just noticed this I've now added a new drive after previous lost-disk rebalance was completed, old drives have a minus number (freeing up space) and new drive has a big number for where it'll increase to. This is probably adequate enough for most purposes.
  2. Maybe not immediately, hence why I said "can it calculate" - I'm aware it wouldn't instantaneously know and re-measuring is necessary. - Losing a disk - can the existing drives hold all the data and retain replication property (pool was not full) - Losing a disk - how big of a drive do you need to replace it to retain replication property (pool was full) My thing is DP should be able to figure out both BEFORE duplicating simply fails from lack of disk space. Right now all you get is a percent of duplication progress and for rebuilds that take multi-day you don't want it to randomly
  3. Correct, in that case you don't know until the files are added to the pool and that is a different beast all together since you're talking in the realm of useable vs true disk space. However this is about resatisfying existing content replication rules. DP knows what was lost, how it needs to be replaced, and ultimately knows it needs X disk space to satisfy it. To further your point, I concede now that a "free space" counter does not make sense, however a "disk space needed for resatisfying replication" seems deterministic to me - in the case of a dead drive being replaced. A super
  4. Well that's the part I feel like could be pre-calculated. Balancing with the rules you have in place should be deterministic, no? At least in my mind balancing is following a plan, hence the percent completed being able to be displayed.
  5. That's why it's so complex, it is up to what the replication rules for the lost-data was set to. For example, the balancing finished and I was left with 1TB free (and with my replication rules in place that realistically means 0.5TB useable). I guess the ultimate question is if there's a way to calculate estimated actual disk space free.
  6. Hello, Hopefully this question makes sense. I have a big DrivePool and one of my 8TB drives just died. While waiting for my Ironwolf 16TB to replace it, re-balancing across the other drives has begun. However, it will be a multi-day rebuild, and drive space will definitely be tight - leading to my questions: 1. Is DrivePool smart enough to know if there's enough space to rebuild with my replication rules (2X globally, 3X for special folders) or not? 2. Does DrivePool know how much free space will be available once rebuilding is finished? 3. Is that presented to the user some
  7. My father when trying to access our pool encountered similar issues like this before. At the time, a restart fixed the problem and we all had permission to access the pool again (read was fine, writes weren't allowed). From there we just considered it a fluke and updated to the latest beta build. Havne't encountered it since.
  8. That sounds fantastic. And just to confirm - I can do this sort of functionality without relying on their Cloud? (That is to say, their free plan)?
  9. I definitely agree with you both - that I should employ some sort of cloud solution - to at least get rid of the 'single point of catastrophic failure' (and quite honestly, had slipped my mind, I'll look into this later in the week, Amazon has a $60/yr "Unlimited" Photos/Videos storage plan - but I'll dig deeper) However, that alone won't really address my issue - as you mentioned by yourself "as long as you noticed before the deletion goes out of rotation". I can't necessarily trust that we'll happen to find out the file was missing. Things could disappear and we wouldn't even know they
  10. Hi folks, Got a question I figure maybe some people in here have thought about. So there's the age old debate of duplication vs. replication - and I get it. I've got family photos in a DrivePool with 3x Global Duplication (around 1TB total). Now this is all replicated in the pool. While this protects against hard drive failures, this does not protect against mistakes. My father could delete the Photo directory and it's effectively game over (yes there are undelete tools but lets ignore that for the sake of the argument). What I am wondering is if people have any tried-and-teste
  11. Thanks for the clarification. Just didn't want to make a mistake. My DrivePool (minus the one drive) is now balancing. Around 40% done so I will let that finish overnight. I'm running chkdsk /B on the potentially problematic drive now, that will also run overnight. Could very well be possible there's nothing wrong with the drive and was simply some weird state the OS was in. Fingers crossed. I've got chkdsk /B running on the drive inside another machine. Edit.
  12. You'll want to open diskmgmt.msc and from there right click the drives in an order that does not produce conflicts. See: http://wiki.covecube.com/StableBit_DrivePool_Q6811286 If you don't want WXYZ to be seen at all, then you do not need to give them drive letters (DrivePool will still be able to pool them together) - Instead of clicking "Change" simply click "Remove" when dealing with the drive letters. Probably the easiest order to do this if you want to keep every drive with drive letters: Change F to D Change E, G, H, I to W, X, Y, Z Change J to E (now that E has been
  13. Hi folks, I've got a drive in a pool that has un-readable sectors (GLOBAL 2x DUPLICATION) As of right now, it seems Scanner is reporting 4838830 unreadable sectors (2.31GB) after finishing its scan. I have the option to start a File scan, but I have not started it yet. --- Meanwhile, on the DrivePool side: The affected disk has been limited: There is a red arrow offering: "New file placement limit: 0.00GB" There is a blue arrow offering: "Duplicated target for re-balancing (-2.04TB)" A few other drives in the pool have a blue arrow "Duplicated target for r
  14. Sounds good. Thanks for the background info. Successfully pulled out and formatted the two removed drives, and replaced them with 2 new 8TBs. No issues to report. Thanks again for the great product. Made a potentially scary problem very easy to handle.
  15. Hello, Thanks for the feedback. You are correct, while the first drive was mid-removal (lets say 1% or something), I queued up the second drive to be removed. I was not actively removing anything from the pool, but that is not to say something automated/service-like was accessing something on the system. And also to clarify: The lingering 400GB on both removed drives were equivalent, and match CRC on the pool post-removal. My initial issue was I didn't want to delete the PoolPart folders on the 2 removed drives unless I was 100% sure they were still persisted within the p
  • Create New...