GDog

Shane: Hi, and thanks for your help! The answer as to whether I am using any part of my system drive as part of the Pool, is NO - Never. My System Drive has never been anything other than the System Drive. It is a 300GB WD Raptor partitioned into a 160GB C-Part and the remainder as a D-Part. The D-Part has always shown up as being available to add to the Pool, but I have never done it. I was planning to either run the Restore from Windows > Macrium Reflect App, which if memory serves me, sets up a special Boot path and then requires a Reboot of the PC, ... OR, I could just boot from the Restore USB I created inside Macrium Reflect. Which of these choices do you think would be best - or maybe it doesn't matter. Running Macrium Rescue from inside Windows is a lot faster and less prone to boot issues I think. I had NOT planned on disconnecting the Drives, just doing the Restore and Rebooting. Is there anything I need to do to make sure I don't lose any data? Thanks Shane, Gary

Hi All, I am running WHS2011, 92TB Server, 65TB used, 98% Duplicated, 29 Physical Disks, DrivePool v2.2.2.934. I need to RESTORE my System Drive from a Macrium Reflect Image done about a week ago to resolve an issue unrelated to DrivePool or the Pool, that cannot be resolved any other way. My question is if I do that, can DrivePool recover from this and get my Pool back to where it was without any loss of Data saved after the Restore image? Also, is there any specific procedure I need to follow to prevent Data loss, like disconnecting all drives beforehand etc etc.? Thanks for any help, Gary

Mick Mickie: Thanks for jumping in Mick! Christopher just said "Crashes", so I thought the "Fix" might not help me. I don't usually upgrade to Beta versions of anything, but in this case I think I might make an exception. I was just upgrading to sort of get away from the built-in wssx versions in preparation for my upcoming move to Server 2016 Essentials. Again, thanks! Gary

Thanks for getting back to me. However: I don't think my WHS2011 system has EVER crashed - not once!. It hung up once, but it was MY fault. I only reboot it when the MS Updates tell me I have to. I did't lose just SOME of my Disk settings, I lost ALL of them - 100%! Do you still think that cause would apply to me? Gary

Christopher: So do you have any other ideas I can try? I really do not want to, nor should I have to, re-do everything at each upgrade, don't you agree? Thanks Christopher, Gary

Hi Christopher! I tried that already but there is no JSON folder in the .wssx version I upgraded FROM. I discovered your thread from July 2018 AFTER I posted this, sorry about that. Gary

Last night, I decided to upgrade from Scanner 2.5.1.3062 (wssx) to Scanner 2.5.4.3216 (exe). At first, the install failed and told me I needed to UN-install the prior version before I could proceed with the upgrade to 2.5.4.3216 (exe). So I did this from the Dashboard (Remove Add-in). Afterward, it did not ask me to reboot, so I didn't, thinking my current configs would more likely be preserved than if I did. The RE-Reinstall went OK with no errors and it reported the install as "Successful". After running the new version for the first time, I immediately noticed that ALL (100%) of my Disk Settings were GONE - the Custom Names and Locations, which I had painstakingly created so I could tell my disks apart from one another. This is important, since (1) I have 27 Disks, (2) most of my disks are WD Reds and (3) my old Supermicro PCI-X controllers are not reporting the correct serial numbers using the Sonnet driver I must use with them to allow disks greater than 2TB. I have always relied on Scanner to be able to locate the correct Disk that might need to be removed! I would seriously like to NOT have to go through that whole process again, SO ... is there any way to recover this information BACK into Scanner? PLUS, I am concerned that this is now going to happen every time I upgrade to a newer version. Is it? Thanks in advance for any help you might be able to provide. Really appreciate it! Gary

Hello everyone! I was recently given a brand new WD MyCloud EX4 4-Bay NAS, already populated with 4 x brand new 3TB WD Red HDD's (NASware 3.0). I can always just pull the drives and install them in some of my other available slots, and sell the NAS Box or utilize it in some other way. But ... my main server box of 15 drives is already full, as is also my only decent exterior storage box of 5 more drives. The only available space I have (if I don't find a way to utilize the WD Box), is an open & exposed 5-Bay Sans Digital Hard Drive Rack that I set up to be just a temporary facility until I could find something better. It only has one drive in it at present, so it could hold all 4 of the drives from the WD NAS box if need be, However, I would REALLY like to utilize this very nicely constructed WD NAS Box, preferably as-is. Its only method of external communication is Ethernet without me hacking on it to make it SAS compatible, like I did with my AMS NAS Box (see signature details). The WD MyCloud manual says I can configure 1 or all 4 of the drives in JBOD mode. SO ... I could do that and put the box on my Network. What I don't know is if I utilize the drives this way, will DrivePool even SEE them at all? And if DP does see them, will it see them as 4 separate drives, as I would prefer, or just as one 12TB drive? OR ... is there some specific way to set this up such that DP can see and control the drives in the WD Box as if they were 4 separate drives? Also, all my Pooled drives are mounted like: "Disk01", "Disk02", "Disk19" etc. Naturally I would prefer to be able to do the same for the drives in the WD NAS Box. Would this be possible? Here are some information Links for this WD NAS Box: Overview Manual Specifications Knowledge Base Shares Online User Guide & Solutions I have spent hours pouring through the WD knowledge base, and various Forums (mostly this one) and I cannot find anything that addresses this specifically. I suspect that what I want can't be done, because (as far as I can see), the only way to access a specific drive behind this NAS Box is to MAP it, which has all the limitations associated with that. I hope I'm wrong, but given my very limited knowledge on this subject, it looks like to me that I might have to do essentially the same thing I did with my AMS NAS Box. This would mean bypassing the NAS electronics portions of the Box and install a SAS 8087-to-8088 adapters to connect the drives semi-directly to the controllers in the main chassis, using something like THIS or THIS and THIS and THIS. Is there such a thing as an Ethernet to SAS converter? (JK) Or maybe, depending on what you guys tell me, I might just keep the drives, sell the Box and buy a more suitable Multi-HDD chassis. I don't know what to do. If anyone has any experience with doing this or any knowledge, I sure would greatly appreciate some advice. Thanks so much, Gary (GDog)

Thanks Christopher! I should have thanked you sooner, but I had trouble logging onto the Forums AGAIN! Sorry. Gary

Just a quick question here, I promise. Basis: I do not operate my Server headless. When I am logged onto the Server directly as Administrator, in File Explorer, in the Navigation pane, I can see my ‘Local Disk C:’ Drive and the (2nd partition) ‘Local Disk D:’ drive like when I log onto any other PC. BUT, I can ALSO see another drive that seems to have been created by DrivePool. I am assuming it is a "Virtual" Pooled Drive. In my case it is named the ‘Local Disk S:’ Drive. There are only 3 folders in the ‘S:’ drive: the ‘Recycle’ Folder, the ‘System Volume Information’ Folder and a Folder named ‘ServerFolders’. I can open ‘ServerFolders’ from Explorer and I can see all the Server Shares or Folders. Until recently, I have left this ‘S:’ Drive alone thinking it was something I shouldn’t mess with directly. Recently however, I have experimented with Reading and Writing to Folders in those Shares with no apparent problems. Doing it this way seems to bypass the network and feels significantly faster that doing the same operations from another PC accessing the shares over the network. When I setup Macrium Reflect to backup images of my Server Hard Drive (C: & D: ), I set Reflect to write the backup images directly to the assigned Folder and it seems to be working perfectly. My question is this: Is it safe, advisable or doesn’t matter to Read, Write and Move files around my shares by accessing them this way directly from the Server and not through the Network? Am I causing any problems or issues with DrivePool or my data by doing it like this? Thanks everyone! -GDog

@Christopher (Drashna) Well, not completely. I am still left wondering about these things... Windows 10 as a Server questions: 1. Licensing: You brought up a change that put the user in violation of the EULA if it is used as a “Server”, per se’. If I go this route in spite of this, am I going to run into Activation problems initially OR down the road? 2. Dashboard: Would I have use of a “Dashboard” like in WHS2011 where I can see all my Drives and Shares together on the same page? 3. Drive Mounting: Will I be able to mount my drives into Folders like WHS2011 allows? Related to this: Are there any limits as to the number of Drives I can have attached? 4. Hardware: Are there any restrictions as to what kind of Hardware I can use? Specifically, a lot of my Hardware is SERVER HW, like my Motherboard, SATA cards & Expanders etc. Are any of these forbidden? Am I going to be able to get DRIVERS for all this Server HW? 5. SB Scanner: I absolutely want to be able to run this Add-in. I'm running DrivePool 2.x now as a standalone, and I am OK with it. However, I don't see that with Scanner. My version is 2.5.3062, which I think *IS* the latest one. But it ONLY comes up within the WHS2011 Dashboard, nowhere else. If I go to Win10 Pro, how would I continue with Scanner? Is there a version that will run as a standalone? 6. Third Party Guides: Terry Walsh has published an updated eBook as a Guide to doing this: "BUILDING A WINDOWS 10 HOME SERVER - ANNIVERSARY UPDATE EDITION". However, it is somewhat pricey for an eBook ($16) and I wanted to know what YOU thought about it beforehand. I know you are unhappy with him about the way he handled the Forum shutdown (so am I), but if it is a worthwhile publication then I can overlook my issues with that somewhat. Plus, I am sure you have heard about it, but have you READ it? If not, do you know anyone who HAS read it whose opinion you would/could trust? Is it worth it for someone like me to buy this book and setup his Win10 Server using it as a Guide? If not Terry’s guide, then can you recommend another one I could use so I don’t have to keep pestering you with my incessant questions? These are just the few questions/issues I was able to conjure up on the spur of the moment here. I am sure there will be more as I get further into this project. Thanks so much Christopher! I *do so* appreciate all that you do here to not just support us, but provide genuine HELP! -Gary

Definitely you. I'm not at all agitated. I was just trying to express another way of looking at it. I knew when I wrote it however, that sometimes it can APPEAR that way, so I actually tried to avoid that in the way I wrote it. Maybe I didn't do such a great job with that, but rest assured I am NOT agitated. I'm also not bashful or timid. When I *am* agitated, and I want you to know it, you will, without any doubt. I am looking hard at this option. It seems to be the best, most economical option for people like me (and maybe you) that just want a Home Media Server without any fancy Server features. Terry Walsh wants $16 for his latest iteration of his book: "BUILDING A WINDOWS 10 HOME SERVER - ANNIVERSARY UPDATE EDITION", but I would like to hear what someone here has to say about it before I drop the coin on it. IOW: is it WORTH the money, or can I assemble the information myself from various articles published on the Web Re this subject. Plus, I am still more than a little irritated at the way Terry handled shutting down that very excellent "We Got Served" Forum, and I am not sure I want to give him any support in his eBook efforts. What if I buy this version of that eBook and a few months later he releases an updated version? Would I have to spend the entire amount AGAIN? I'm not comfortable that Terry would handle that in an "I care about my supporters" way, if you know what I mean. I tried W10 when it first came out and didn't like the new UI AT ALL! Up to now, I have avoided it like the Plague. The *ONLY* reason I am considering it now is because of its apparent ability to act as a sort of "Pseudo-Home Server". But I have some questions about this. @Christopher (Drashna): I asked you some questions about W10 in my reply to your reply to me (above), but you never addressed them for me. I would appreciate it if you could shed some more SPECIFIC light on this "W10 as a Server" thing, as I am still hanging on whether to go this route or just stay with a REAL Server OS. It is unlikely however, that I would ever do anything of a highly advanced nature with my Server OS. Thanks, -Gary

Well, this is confusing at best. There HAS to be more to this than what we are seeing and interpreting here. On the one hand, MS is selling a Server OS that allows 25 users, 50 devices and no CALs required. Then, out of the other side of their mouth, they are allowing only TWO of those 25 users to be logged in at the same time? That would mean that the other 23 users had to sit and wait until one of the two already allowed logs out before they can log in. Huh? This would also mean that there is no solution for this, since the Essentials version does not support or deal with CAL’s at all. There would be no way to expand the maximum number of concurrent users. Huh? Where's the value? This makes no sense AT ALL! Why would anyone pay $4-500 for such an Operating System? Who would want it? Who could make any use of it? Just myself and my Family of 3 other users would hit that wall straight away! If this is true, then it’s a deal-breaker for me as well. Given that however, I don’t know where to go beyond WHS2011. There MUST be more to it that we are not seeing or not aware of. Christopher (Drashna)! Can you shed some light on this conundrum please?

Umfriend: I do actually use WHS for client backups, I said it’s just not the one I RELY on, that’s really all. Reason is because WHS has failed to restore about half of the PC’s I have asked it to do. Macrium Reflect has NEVER let me down. In addition, this way I have 2 sets of backups, which can’t hurt except for the drive space required to have it. BTW: Regarding the backup thing, consider this: Macrium Reflect is fully network aware, and full or incremental image backups can be scheduled to happen automatically, in the background, at any degree of bandwidth, at any chosen time, written to any network share or connected PC, with post-backup verifications and terminations. All this is in the FREE version. The Paid version allows differential and file backups as well. So, if backup is the only reason YOU are using WHS2011, then I ask you: Why are YOU using it? Also, don’t forget that WHS2011 was WAY CHEAP compared to these newer Server OS’s. If you recall, it was never sold as a Retail package. You could buy it in the retail channel (I bought my copy through Newegg for like ~$50), but it was only ever intended to be sold to entities that manufactured their PC’s as OEM's. This could describe me and every PC I have ever owned except for the Laptops. At the time, $50 was about 1/3 the cost of any other OS MS was selling. As far as what I use it for, besides the secondary backups, I just use it mostly as a Media Server to stream my collections of Music, Movies and Misc Videos. It is by far the most stable OS I have ever had. Each of my Family members has their own Shares, but I am not sure what they are using those for beyond storage of mostly their music. Are you saying that I can do these things just as effortlessly with any MS Desktop OS??? I never really considered that, but I might now if we can’t resolve this concurrent user thing brought up by Jaga!

I don't understand all this talk about CAL's. I went to the Microsoft site and found this: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/cloud-platform/windows-server-pricing It CLEARLY states that the Essentials version of Server 2016 allows 25 users and 50 devices with NO CALs REQUIRED. Am I missing something here? If so, please enlighten me. Gary