Christopher (Drashna)

As Umfriend mentioned, balancing runs in a background priority. That means that if there is other activity on the pool, it may/will cause the balancing to take longer to complete. You can temporarily up the priority, by clicking on the ">>" icon at the bottom when balancing is occuring, though.

For anyone still experiencing this, please download this version (or a newer release): http://dl.covecube.com/ScannerWindows/beta/download/StableBit.Scanner_2.6.0.3350_BETA.exe That should fix the issue causing this problem, and allow the software to work correctly.

To update you, Alex is already planning on implementing such a link. It's half there, as he's still working on that specific feature.

Ideally, you'd want to remove the disk from the Pool using the normal method and then add the new disk. Anything outside of that is basically not supported, because it is prone to issues and complications.

That may be an issue with the version of the Client Backup database. Are you using this on? http://wiki.covecube.com/WhsDbDataDump_2.0 If so, that may be why, if you were using WHS2011. In that case, try: http://dl.covecube.com/WhsDbDataDump/BETA/WhsDbDataDump-1_0_0_6-BETA.zip

Well, the removal failing is. And unfortunately, because the disk is having issues, the remeasure is worse (since it's I/O intensive). And I don't think the remeasure is normal here, but I'd have to double check. And that there are disk issues .... if the drive disconnects and reconnects during this process, it will trigger a remeasure to occur, which may be what is happening here. As for balancing, yeah, that's intentional. And either way, the "dpcmd ignore-poolpart" command should be pretty instantaneous, and should prevent the issue from occurring (but may trigger a remeasure)

Noted, and will pass that feedback along.

Sorry for the delay in getting back to you! The simplest way would be to create a new disk and move the data over directly. However, if it's in a pool, the ... simplest way would be to add the new disk to the pool and just remove the old disk from the pool.

You're very welcome. Also, if you want, open a ticket at https://stablebit.com/Contact about this issue, and we can see about checking if StableBit DrivePool is the issue.

Okay, could you open a ticket at https://stablebit.com/Contact ?

Oooh, You don't want to use the Ordered File Placement balancer with the SSD Optimizer. This creates a circumstance where it will forever move files around. If you want to use both, then only enable the SSD Optimizer, and then use the "Ordered Placement" section in the SSD Optimizer. Also, if you're using duplication, you really want/need 2x "SSD" drives

Unfortunately, this is one of the things that StableBit Scanner does not do. That said, you may want to run CHKDSK on the disk in question, or data recovery, rather than initializing it. But yeah, if this drive is having issues above and has show up with a damaged or missing file system, it's probably dead or dying, and should be replaced.

Sorry for not getting to you sooner. The "cyclic redundancy check" error indicates either file system issues, or outright disk corruption. Either way, "bad". As for the "files in use", you can use the "Force close" option, and this may help. Additionally, you could use "dpcmd ignore-poolpart X: 9c1fe6e2-37d0-4425-88c8-9fe5e99b8512", and this will immediately eject the drive from the pool, without moving the files off of it.

You could copy the data, mirroring it on the Synology NAS, but you wouldn't be able to use it as a parity drive, as far as I'm aware.

Correct, no we don't support that. Unfortunately, getting most anything but the filename is a LOT more expensive in terms of system resources. And since a LOT of this code needs to run in the kernel, any extra will add up exponentially. However, you could do by extension, as that can be a good indicator of range of the file size.

It won't restart. IIRC, it require manual confirmation/intervention to install and update, but it can be configured to automatically download the update. We don't want to have automatic installation, since 2 out of 3 of our products may/do require reboots to properly update them. So, the idea/plan/design is to notify you about them (much as what is already done), and then let you choose if and when to install those updates. But to also provide better and more control over the process, and to fix some of the functionality (eg, if you installed a public beta, you'd get other public beta notifications, and then the release notification. If you updated to the release, you would no longer get notifications about the beta).

Try setting the service startup to "Automatic (delayed)" and see if that helps.

I suspect that this issue is unrelated to the other issues posted here. Also, I believe that you have already opened a ticket.

That depends on what is going on, actually. If you're reading and writing to the pool, or measuring, then the usage can/will jump up. Also, notice that this is paged memory, not non-paged, so it's not actively in memory, IIRC. Additionally, things like virus scanners can cause this to grow more rapidly, IIRC. And that does appear to be 2.8GB paged. However, if you're especially concerned about this, please head to https://stablebit.com/Contact and open a ticket

Unfortunately, there won't be a lot that really can be done. If there are issues accessing the data on the drive, then there are issues accessing the data on the drive. It doesn't matter from where that access comes from. That said, there is the "force damaged disk removal" option, which does skip over problem files. Additionally, the "dpcmd" utility has the "ignore-poolpart" command that will immediately drop a disk from the pool, without moving the data off of the disk. The "ignore-poolpart" command was actually added Nov 2015, and in response to this sort of issue, if not this issue explicitly. As for the command itself, the "xxxxx" part of the "PoolPart.xxxxx" folder on the disk is the pool ID that you'd need to remove that disk from the pool. (there are actually a couple of ways to get this info, but this is probably the simplest, and most obvious way to identify the disk <-> pool ID relationship.

This is normal. StableBit DrivePool doesn't clean up the empty folders, unless they're actively removed from the pool. There are a number of reasons for this, including hidden settings stored on the folders themselves (such as duplication data).

I'm sorry to hear about the drive! And yes, pulling it from the system in this case is actually one of the things that we would recommend in this sort of case (though, generally as a last resort).

That will work, but the measurement data will be out of sync. A better solution would be to use the File Placement rule, so you can just copy to the pool, and it will handle things automatically for you

Were these drives ReFS? If so, it may cause issues with version differences. Otherwise, data recovery should work.

Yeah, that would do it. Though, heads up, most of the balancers don't actually run most of the time, and are only to handle specific cases. So balancing should be minimal, when it's enabled.