Jump to content
Covecube Inc.

Alex

Administrators
  • Content Count

    251
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    46

Everything posted by Alex

  1. As the developer I should mention something important here. The disk scan speed is really not our top priority. While we have a very fast surface scanner (as is advertised in the Features tab), it is not always running at full speed. Because we're running in a multitasking environment, our top priority is not to interfere with other applications using the disk. You can override this behavior under the Throttling tab in Scanner Settings and have faster scan times at the expense of system slowdown, but I don't recommend it. In short, the StableBit Scanner is tuned towards not inter
  2. Alex

    Surface scan and SSD

    Hi Saiyan, I'm the developer. The Scanner never writes to SSDs while performing a surface scan and therefore does not in any way impact the lifespan of the SSD. However, SSDs do benefit from full disk surface scans, just like spinning hard drive, in that the surface scan will bring the drive's attention to any latent sectors that may become unreadable in the future. The Scanner's disk surface scan will force your SSD to remap the damaged sectors before the data becomes unreadable. In short, there is no negative side effect to running the Scanner on SSDs, but there is a positive one
  3. JMarsh, After a successful drive removal, DrivePool does not leave any of your files only in the removed PoolPart and not on the pool. As you've mentioned this would mean that something like a backup database would become useless or perhaps corrupt. In fact, while a drive removal is taking place, DrivePool makes your entire pool read-only just to safeguard your data from something like that happening. But there are a few cases where your files will remain on the PoolPart: If there is a mismatch in the file times or the file sizes between a file in a PoolPart and the same file on the
  4. Oh no... It seems that you've taken a 64-bit dump of a 32-bit process (the Scanner is a 32-bit process). Unfortunately I can't open such a dump, it's simply not possible. You will need to launch a 32-bit task manager in order to take a dump of the Scanner service: C:\Windows\SysWOW64\taskmgr.exe I'm sorry about that (sigh). I wish we could make this process simpler.
  5. Yes, for some data. You can set Smart_NoWmi to True (service .config setting) to never use WMI for SMART data. But the Scanner always uses WMI to enumerate the list of available disks. I see your Scanner service dump and I'll take a look at it now to see why it's locked up.
  6. Alex

    Submit to BitFlock

    Tayub, Normally the submission should take a few minutes and no one outside of Covecube will be able to see your SMART data. I'm not sure why it took a few days. I typically go through the "unreconciled" SMART data every month or so in order to improve our SMART interpretation capability. Regards,
  7. Just to follow up on this, I've done extensive troubleshooting on this issue with Kihim in a support ticket. It seems like this is caused by the system getting bogged down at certain times leading to a periodic slowdown in the UI. At least that's what I can see from the Scanner's built-in UI performance profiler (accessed by pressing P in a BETA build). I don't see any Scanner UI task running away with the CPU. I've also set up a local test rig with similar specs, 26 disks and a 2Ghz 8-core AMD server, and have run the Scanner UI for hours looking for any slowdowns and I couldn't find
  8. Kihim, I've looked at the DrivePool dumps and it's pretty clear that the DrivePool service is waiting for a WMI query to return. The query is intended to synchronize disk metadata between the StableBit Scanner and StableBit DrivePool. It looks like this: Management scope: root\StableBit\Scanner SELECT * FROM Disks WHERE DeviceIndex = "..." I would need to see a memory dump of the Scanner.Service.exe when it is in this locked up state, in order to understand why it has locked up. Perhaps it's for the same reason, a stuck WMI query. The Scanner does query WMI whenever it detects
  9. Pal, The problem was probably corrected by chkdsk before the Scanner could get to it. The problem here is that if the Scanner detects damage, and then you (or some other app) runs chkdsk to repair the problem, the Scanner is not notified. This is something that I'm working on improving, although I'm not sure how it can be fixed. In any case, there is no harm in what you did. The Scanner simply ran chkdsk and chkdsk told it that all is ok. As far as chkdsk logs, no, the Scanner doesn't keep a log of that anywhere. But this is not a bad idea. I've added this to the todo list and
  10. As far as WSS is concerned (WHS 2011, WSS 2012 and R2), 2.0 doesn't fully replace 1.X. We will continue to rev 1.X for time being. In fact, there should be a new version of 1.X coming up in the next few weeks. In short, for now 1.X is targeted at WHS 2011 users (and similar). So what doesn't 2.X support? In particular 2.X doesn't support the following for WSS (which 1.X does): No Dashboard notifications. No WSSX installer. It doesn't understand server backup disks and OS partitions and will allow you to add them to the pool. So in short, 1.X was deeply optimized for the WSS platform
  11. You're right, the temperature in DrivePool was not respecting the C/F setting in the Scanner. This has already been fixed in the latest builds of DrivePool 2.X but it requires a new build of the Scanner which have not been built yet. The next build of the Scanner will have the necessary code to make this work. So in short, this will resolve itself with some time and a newer build.
  12. JSox, Hi, I'm the developer. The temperature history is something that the drive maintains itself. Not all drives maintain this history so you won't see it for every drive. This is part of the "SCT" standard and the StableBit Scanner is able to parse that information and display it in a graph. In addition, we can tell the drive to change its sampling interval. regards,
  13. Alex

    Beta Updater

    I've been debating how to handle automatic updates while we're in BETA. There are 2 issues I think: Too many updates are annoying. (E.g. Flash) Because this is a BETA there is the potential for a build to have some issues, and pushing that out to everyone might not be such a good idea. So I've come up with a compromise. The BETA automatic updates will not push out every build, but builds that have accumulated some major changes since the last update. Also, I don't want to push the automatic update as soon as the build is out because I want to give our users the chance to submit feedback
  14. Alex

    Beta 320 BSOD

    I've looked at the dump that was referencing this thread and this has already been fixed and the fix will be available in the next public build.
  15. Alex

    Scanner Scheduling?

    Joe, I'll try to add the ability to limit automatic scanning to days of the week or days of the month in a future build. Thanks for the suggestion,
  16. We can set up a remote support session on this if you'd like. I'll log into your server and take a look at the problem. I'll private message you the details in a second.
  17. Good to know that this is resolved. Build 320 resolves a bug that was (unfortunately) introduced in 312 which I think was responsible for this and some other issues that people have been reporting.
  18. If you are looking for a way to backup only the "master" copy of a file and not the duplicated part, then that is not possible. DrivePool has no notion of a master copy vs. a backup copy. Each copy of the same file is exactly identical, and the copies can reside on any pool part. If you want to backup your duplicated pooled files without backing them up twice, you will need to use a backup solution that does deduplication (E.g. the client computer backup engine part of the Windows Home Server 2011 / Windows Server 2012 Essentials). Alternatively you can use a file based backup system t
  19. Alex

    Symbolic Link Support

    JazzMan, Simply put, it is much harder than I initially thought to make a reliable implementation of symbolic links. As far as I can tell, we can make a reliable implementation in the future, it's just going to take some time. Look for this in a future build. Regards,
  20. Alex

    Symbolic Link Support

    Thanks for testing it out. My initial implementation in build 281 above was based on the premise that we can reuse the reparse functionality that's already present in NTFS. I've been reading up some more on exactly how this is supposed to work and playing around with some different approaches, it looks like the entire concept of reusing NTFS for this is not going to work. So don't use build 281 I'm going to take the current reparse implementation out and rewrite it from scratch using a different approach. Using this new approach, reparse points (or symbolic links) will app
  21. Alex

    Symbolic Link Support

    Guys, I've added preliminary support for symbolic links (reparse points). It still needs more testing, but here is the internal build with this feature: http://dl.covecube.com/DrivePoolWindows/beta/download/StableBit.DrivePool_2.0.0.281_x64_BETA.exe http://dl.covecube.com/DrivePoolWindows/beta/download/StableBit.DrivePool_2.0.0.281_x86_BETA.exe
  22. Because there is no way to query the disk for its current standby settings, the checkbox defaults to an indeterminate state. You can only set standby. I would suggest that if you would like to set different standby times on a per-disk basis then use the firmware, but if you just want a single standby time for all the disks then use Windows.
  23. This is actually a fairly complicated topic. Let's start by talking about how normal standby works without the StableBit Scanner getting involved. Windows "Put the Disk to Sleep" Feature Normally, Windows will monitor the disk for activity and if there is no disk activity for some preset amount of time it will put the disk to "sleep" by flushing all of the data in the cache to the disk and sending a special standby command to it. At the same time, it will remember that the disk is asleep in case any other application asks. Shortly after the disk goes to sleep, the StableBit Sca
  24. Parity has some advantages and disadvantages. The short answer is that it doesn't make sense to put parity into the current version of DrivePool. We would need a new product that is a block based pooling solution. This block based DrivePool would have some advantages and disadvantages over the current file based DrivePool. The main disadvantage would be that your files would no longer be stored as standard NTFS files on the physical disk. Overall I feel that there are a lot of other well established block based pooling solutions out there and I'm not sure that we would bring anythi
  25. I would be very interested in seeing their architecture and comparing it to DrivePool, point by point. ---- It should prove to be interesting.
×
×
  • Create New...