Jump to content
Google Drive is Discontinued (FAQ added)

TomTiddler

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    21

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by TomTiddler

    Problem with symlinks 'disappearing'

    in Nuts & Bolts

    Posted · Edited by TomTiddler
    Clarification

    I have a pool (call it IANSPOOL) which has the following file system structure within it ....

    IANSPOOL

        --->Music

             --->ITunes

                   ----ITunes Music

     

    I now create a symlink at IANSPOOL\Music\Music  which points to IANSPOOL\Music\ITunes\ITunes Music

    I used "mklink /d " to create the symlink

    I checked that this worked, and sure enough I can display IANSPOOL\Music\Music in File Explorer and see all of the files under IANSPOOL\Music\ITunes\ITunes Music. IANSPOOL is shared on my network as \\ROOTMACHINE\IANSPOOL, and I checked that the symlink worked through the network. No problem.

    Later that day I noticed that one of my applications that makes my music library available as a media stream only had a fraction of the library available, sure enough there was still a directory showing at IANSPOOL\Music\Music but it only contained a fraction of the actual files, and more importantly, it was no longer a symlink!!

     

    Does anyone have a clue what could be going on?

     

    Edit -- If it helps I've checked all the machines in my network and all have "fsutil behavior query symlinkevaluation" showing all modes set to enabled (L2L, L2R, R2L, and R2R)

    Reorganizing my pools

    in General

    Posted

    3 hours ago, Jonibhoni said:

    DrivePool doesn't have the concept of a "primary" and a "secondary" pool. So there is no "only duplicates" in the meaning of "the copy of the original" because there is no "original" - all two copies of a 2x-duplicated file are valid and equal. DrivePool fetches any of them when you access it and just makes sure that there are always 2x the file stored physically within your pool, without any of them being superior.

    So much for the theory. In practice, what you want to do ...

    ... is perfectly doable. You create a third, "parent" pool that contains pool 1 and pool 2 (and nothing else). In this parent pool, you set duplication for the whole pool to 2x. (In the lower pools 1 and 2, you disable duplication). Then you move all your files to the parent pool and DrivePool will distribute one copy of each file on pool 1 and one copy on pool 2.

    If you simply move the files from your original pool (now "pool 1") to the parent pool, you will be fine, you just have to wait for all the 20 TB being moved. If you are more adventurous, you can also go through a procedure referred to as "seeding" (https://wiki.covecube.com/StableBit_DrivePool_Q4142489) which will skip half of the disk writing work (but is more difficult and risky).

    Many thanx @Jonibhoni, i had come to much the same conclusion, but was hoping to avoid the "seeding" process. Oh well, nothing ventured ........ I guess I'll give it a go tomorrow ;)

    Reorganizing my pools

    in General

    Posted

    I currently have two pools, and last week due to an issue with my hardware, I needed to rearrange a lot of data (>20TB). As of this message I have all of my data on one pool, unduplicated. I'd like to make the second pool (currently empty) act as the "duplicated store", so that all the primary data is on Pool 1, and all of the duplicated data (and only duplicates) is on Pool 2. I know I can make Pool 2 a member of Pool 1, but I can't figure out what the file placement settings should be to make all the duplicates be on Pool2 and all the originals on Pool1. 

    In effect I want Pool 2 to be a mirror of Pool 1.

    Is there a simple solution that I'm missing?

    SSD Optimizer not emptying my SSD's

    in Nuts & Bolts

    Posted

    For a month or two, this has all been working fine. I have a pool with 11 disks, 41.8TB total size. Two of the disks are SSDs of 2TB each. Starting 2 days ago I have a single file of about 270GB which stubbornly stays on just one of the SSD's. If I try a manual balance, it just calculates then stops. Service log shows the calculation yields a Balance Ratio of .9909 and the balancing setting is 90%. Is this expected behavior? I'm slightly worried that even if one of the SSD's was completely full, these settings would not generate a balance ratio below 90%

     

    So two questions  a) "does fall below 90%" mean a balance ratio of less than .9000? and b) will a balance ratio of 100% force an SSD to empty?

     

    Simplest way to setup SSD Cache ......

    in Nuts & Bolts

    Posted

    On 11/9/2021 at 3:15 AM, Umfriend said:

    Yes, for multiple drive evac, use of the Drive Usage Limiter balancer is the better way.

    I don't think you can add a single Pool as an SSD to two Pools.

    Rather, you could partition the two SSDs, say 1TB each partition, pool them together as two 2x1TB SSD pool (so Pool C and Pool D) and then add Pool C as SSD for Pool A etc.

    not sure what I should be setting in the Drive Usage Limiter - currently, I'm using two SSD's as cache drives for both Pool A and Pool B, and the drive limiter option has both dupllcated and unduplicated boxes checked for both SSD's.

     

    Simplest way to setup SSD Cache ......

    in Nuts & Bolts

    Posted

    Should have added the following observation, while setting this up, I removed one drive, and then removed a 2nd drive. Immediately, the first one was shown as "removing", while the second one was marked "Waiting to remove". Frustratingly, I then watched DrivePool happily move files from the first to the second, and then, eventually, moving everything off the second one into the rest of the Pool! Maybe the small tweak to mark the "Waiting to remove" drives as "not available to write on" would be a plan :-)

     

    Just saying .......

    Simplest way to setup SSD Cache ......

    in Nuts & Bolts

    Posted

    I have a setup at the moment that has 2 drive pools, call them Pool A and Pool B, each has it's own duplication rules and they work great!

     

    I'd like to "front-end" them with a pair of 2TB SSD's , and thought I could create a new pool consisting of the SSD's (Pool C), designate them as SSD's. i.e.non-archive, then add Pool A and Pool B as members of the front-end pool. Will this work?

    URGENT!! Need help.

    in General

    Posted

    Suddenly this morning, I cannot access folder duplication for my pools. I run 2 pools on a single Windows 10 machine. Both are on Mediasonic boxes connected by USB 3.1. There are 8 drives in each pool. Normally, I can select "Folder duplication" in the UI, and see all the folders in a given pool. This morning, I cannot see any structure, nor can I select "Change Duplication". 

    I don't have enough space on the pools for everything to be duplicated, but DrivePool is duplicating everything right now. It will not have enough room to complete.

    Any suggestions?

    Capture1 shows the Pool view, Capture 2 show what I see when I select "Folder Protection", and Capture 3 shows what's ACTUALLY in 'BRIXPool'.

     

    Capture1.PNG

    Capture2.PNG

    Capture3.PNG

    Bypass File System filters option

    in Nuts & Bolts

    Posted

    Is it possible to get a little more detail on this? Especially the phrase "on-the-fly data manipulation". On the face of it, it seems possible that almost any database operation might qualify, in which case I'm gonna have to do a whole lot of thinking about what gets placed in the pools. 

    Looking for

    1) Some estimate of the potential gain from this.

    2) Clearer notion of what may experience negative effects.

    DrivePool user for years now, and talked at least one buddy into using also. Love this product, and can't say enough good things about the support :-)

    Is DrivePool abandoned software?

    in General

    Posted

    Just my 10 cents here ... as someone that used to design and implement custom file systems, I'm well aware of a) How much work is involved, and B) what a truly splendid job you guys (guy?) have done with DrivePool. I have two fairly large pools running (8 drives 30TB in one, 4 drives 16TB in the other), and have to say zero loss of data ever, and remarkably few problems.

     

    Given how cheap the product is, I would have absolutely NO problem with paying an annual support fee. I suspect that you might see a similar response from the many, many customers who have NOT contributed to this thread. Keep up the good work guys, and don't be put off by the haters/whiners.

     

    IT

×
×
  • Create New...