Christopher (Drashna)

Welcome! If you do run into any issues, let us know, though.

I did/do have a Mac (intel based) that I did use parallels on. And did use the software in, and it worked with no issues. Though, it wasn't a heavy load, at all.

It's "just" a VM platform. You should be able to, yes. And a quick look, you should be able to pass through the whole disk to the VM, too. https://docs.parallels.com/landing/pdfm-ug/parallels-desktop-for-mac-26-users-guide/parallels-desktop-preferences-and-virtual-machine-settings/adding-and-removing-devices/connecting-a-physical-disk-to-a-virtual-machine-as-internal

You are very welcome.

Could you open a ticket at https://stablebit.com/contact then?

If you're using file placement rules and the ordered file placement balancer, you need to configure things specifically to support this. There is a note for this in the balancer's readme, but is obscured by the fact that the balancer is built in now, rather than having to download and install. Specifically: https://dl.covecube.com/DrivePoolBalancingPlugins/OrderedFilePlacement/Notes.txt

Well, part of the issue is that we do try to minimize disk queries. StableBit Scanner (and the other products) look for disk change notifications. Eg, when a disk is connected, disconnected, etc. However, the bitlocker stuff it a special case. Our official stance on this is "no, it's not a good idea, it's actually a really bad idea". Official methods are official for a reason, and using shortcuts, hacks, and other non-official methods means that those behaviors are not documented and not supported. And in fact, are likely to be patched out of existence. Using them leads to an unstable or even unusable product. And we're actively opposed to that, because we have no desire to build, to be very blunt, a shitty product. However, I've passed on the request to Alex, the developer, to see if there is a way that we can improve things here. Because there is always room for improvement, but sometimes it can take an outside perspective. https://stablebit.com/Admin/IssueAnalysis/29129 This won't show any info unless it's posted publicly. Generally, the posts are public, but if there are code changes based on this, those are always public. So I'm posting here so if there is a change or public explantation, it's accessible here.

You shouldn't need to mess with the native service. Mostly, it makes sure that the system shutdown doesn't happen until the service has shut down/ended gracefully. But yes, restarting the "StableBit DrivePool Service" should refresh the drive list. As for why... most of this should happen invisibly, and the goal is to make sure it does. Unfortunately, the bitlocker detection causes issues on some systems. As for "full restart", do you mean of the service? If so, it's because it's loading setting from disk, checking hardware config, and running startup routines (such as checking if the pool needs mounting, etc). Depending on the system and number of disks, this can take a bit to complete. There are some advanced settings that may help, but depend on having more cores in your CPU, basically (eg, by using more threads to run background tasks). That's the thing, we are using the officially support API to check. It's that API that is what causes the drives to wake up on some systems, because Windows considers that activity, and wakes the drive. As for listening to the event viewer, I'm sure that's possible, but as you may have seen, that is a LOT of data to parse, and may cause other issues.

I apologize for missing this. In some cases, restarting the StableBit DrivePool service should forcibly refresh things. If that doesn't help, or you're still seeing issues, please do open a ticket at https://stablebit.com/Contact

By chance, do you have two hidden "PoolPart.xxxx" folders? If so, then this guide should cover how to fix things: https://wiki.covecube.com/StableBit_DrivePool_F1655 Otherwise, you have a "poolPart.xxxx" file? If so, the directory got corrupted, unfortunately. CHKDSK may fix things (but may dump things into a "found.###" folder), or you may need to run data recovery (testdisk+photorec, recuva, etc).

No need to cross post in a bunch of threads. It's counter productive. Also, there is no SMART data for SAS. It's an entirely different thing, using a different protocol (and software that is lazy and calls is SMART do a disservice to everyone). That said, historically, we have opted to not implement SAS because it's not a consumer facing technology. It's meant for businesses/commercial usage. However, that may change due to some of the planned development path for StableBit Cloud. However, there is no ETA on such changes, if they appear, at all. and yes, I too would love to see SAS support. However, it wouldn't be supporting RAID configurations, just HBA/passed through disks, if it does happen.

Make sure you're using the latest beta version. There are some fixes: https://dl.covecube.com/ScannerWindows/beta/download/StableBit.Scanner_2.6.14.4133_BETA.exe That said, the advanced settings, there are a couple of other options that may help (but try the beta first). Namely, in the SMART section, check the "ignoreChecksum" option and restart the service. If that doesn't help, try the "NoWMI" option, as well. If those don't work, head to https://stablebit.com/Contact and open a ticket there. And then run the StableBit Troubleshooter, and use the ID number for that ticket. StableBit Troubleshooter - Covecube - Wiki

You'll also likely need to reset the permissions on the pool, as WHS2011 uses some unusual permissions to manage things. > Then install a new version of Stablebit Pro rather than releasing my old version 1.0 from my WHS2011, I am not bothered about the additional cost. The license is for both versions (the 1.x, and 2.x), so you don't need a new license, at all. You will want to deactivate the license prior to decommissioning the old system/install, as this will free up the license to be activated on the new system. If you run into issues with this, open up a ticket at https://stablebit.com/Contact so we can assist you with the license.

You are very welcome! And for the drives, if you don't already have them, the sooner you can manage, the better. Since prices are only going up.

well, the ordered file placement balancer does try to do this. The old notes for it go over this in a bit of detail. https://dl.covecube.com/DrivePoolBalancingPlugins/OrderedFilePlacement/Notes.txt However, it is a "best effort" and may not accomplish this. And if you download files later on to update an older version, it may not end up on the same disk.

if you're using the newer version and aren't experiencing crashes, then you should be fine.

From the image, and text, it would appear that the J:\ drive has been scanned yet, rather only the beginning has been scanned. Note that resetting the settings does reset this status. StableBit Scanner keeps a map of what has and hasn't been scanned, and when it's been scanned. And as scanned sectors get older, they shift towards yellow to indicate that they haven't been scanned recently. Once a section hits the threshold, it will be queued to scan. Over time, this should lead to scanning when the system isn't as active or in use

To clarify, new files are placed on the drive with the most available free space. This is checked for the absolute value, not for the relative value. Adding the 3rd drive would usually put new files on the new drive, and alternate between the original two (assuming they were equally filled). Also, likely, you'll have a good chunk of "unusable for duplication" space after adding the third drive. In this case, the "Duplication Space Optimizer" balancer will attempt to move files around to eliminate this "unusable for duplication" space. This would mean moving a good chunk of data to the 3rd drive, until that "unusable for duplication" space is gone. (most likely until the two original drives have half as much free space as the new drive, but this depends on capacity of the drives, if there are just 2 drives before, etc).

I have one of the supermicro chassis that supports 36 bays (with 2x SAS2 expander boards), and have populated almost all of them. (there are a couple of slots that are dead, RIP, but 34 is still great). And I use an LSI 9211-8i card (well a ibm serveraid card). I've never had an issue with this setup, and it's been very snappy. (well, some weird issues with firmware and driver versions for the LSI card, and some catastrophes with ReFS, just don't use ReFS) Additionally, i've had a number of customers with even more than that (and at least one person with 100 drives and a PB of data, IIRC). And StableBit DrivePool doesn't care about the number of drives. And it's designed to be very light weight, so that it works well on low end hardware, and higher end hardware. ZFS has issues with a large number of disks because of the scaled need of memory. The more disks (the more capacity), the more memory it needs. And ZFS really should be ran ONLY with ECC memory (you can run it without, but ... you shouldn't). Hardware raid has the issue that the larger the array is, the more likely you'll have a disk failure. And too many failures means that you lose the entire array. And large enough, you heading into the territory where a distributed file system (eg, over the network) may be a better option. We do have a number of users that use snapRAID with the pool, though this isn't supported by us (there are a number of areas that don't play well, like having to completely rebuild after recovery).

If you're experiencing BSODs, please always head to https://stablebit.com/Contact Crashes are always critical issues

Also, you can ignore a setting in StableBit Scanner. Either if the values get worse, it will reflag them, or to permanently ignore them. Depending on the exact values, you may not want to do that. However, IIRC, seek error rate is one that will change based on various factors. So it can improve, and go away. Also, some manufacturers are ... overly aggressive in what is bad.

Unfortunately, exFAT isn't supported by StableBit DrivePool, and the drive needs to be formatted as NTFS. You'd need to clear off all of the data on the drive in question, and reformat it as NTFS. Once you've done so, it should immediately show up in the pool. Also, mixed file systems aren't permitted by default. Differences in support can/would cause issues without essentially created a new file system type to handle that.

Yeah, that looks a wrapping error. And yes, there should be a "submit to Stablebit" option. Either way, would be a good idea to hopen a ticket at https://stablebit.com/Contact, at the very least so we can handle this better.

Disabling write caching on the drives will make them VERY slow. As for explorer vs StableBit DrivePool, balancing and duplication and similar tasks are ran in a background priority. This can cause the transfers to be slower, especially if there is activity on the pool. But I'm glad to hear that this was a simple fix!

That's ... not uncommon. As a smaller vendor, false positives are much more common. Though testing this myself, i don't see it blocking the UI. So likely, the false positive has been resolved already?