Christopher (Drashna)

Ah, okay. Then yeah, that's probably not a good thing then. As for why the WD tool gave the drive an "all clear" ... some SMART values are marked as "pre failure", meaning that they're "more important. Also, there is a threshold value on most drives. If the value isn't marked as pre-failure (and I don't think it is), and it's not above the threshold, the drive may not be flagged as bad by the manufacturer's utilities. But if StableBit Scanner is running into bad sectors as well... then definitely a good idea to replace it.

Well, I'm glad to could get that answered for you. And yeah, I definitely understand wanting to know the limitations and abilities of the software before using it (though, I tend to test first and then ask questions). And as for the 8TB drives, no we don't have any to "give away" (though that would be nice, maybe we should take to Seagate about that! ), but it was an option that may have been useful. If you're willing to invest in it. Though, eventually the SAS Expanders may be be a good idea. I'm getting close to being there myself (my Norco RPC-4220 is 3/5 filled already). And from an organizational and connection standpoint, it may be a better idea in the long run And I swear, I'm not trying to push you to spend money! Though, I may be trying to push myself.... And you're absolutely welcome! In this day and age, it's not enough to have a good product. You have to have good customer service as well, and we try to be prompt, friendly and helpful. And we are very happy when that's appreciated! And if you have any other questions, don't hesitate to ask!

Is this "Pending recount errors", or is this actually "Pending Sector Count"? If this is the "pending sector count", then it may indicate an issue with the drive. Let me (be lazy and) quote from Wikipedia about this value: If you force a surface scan of the disk, I would not be surprised if you start seeing damaged sectors on the disk, as that is what the SMART error usually indicates. As for the WD Utility, it may be be ignoring the value, either by design or because it hasn't hit the "threshold" for the value yet. Either way, if the number keeps growing (and/or grows rapidly), I would recommend replacing the disk. Also, to force a surface scan, open up StableBit Scanner. Find the disk in question, and click on the "+" next to the disk. On the left side of the block map, there should be 4 buttons. The last one should have a green circle with a yellow arrow in it. Click on this one and select the "Mark all good as unchecked". This will cause StableBit Scanner to rescan the disk.

@Ryo: yes, you can deactivate the license, reinstall and then activate it on the new install. To do so, open the UI, click on the "Gear" icon in the top right corner and select "Manage license". @Umfriend: Absolutely. And WHS2011 will continue to to get security updates past it's lifespan, until Server 2008R2 stops getting updates (in 2020, IIRC). So from a security standpoint, it's a viable solution. However, resellers should stop selling it soon, so you may not be able to purchase it at all anymore. Newegg had it again.... for all of a day or two.... Supplies are limited for it, and Microsoft isn't very interested in continuing it... But if it works for you .... that's great. However, I like having a domain and some of the associated benefits of it. But I'm not an average users by any means.

This is going to be a joy to respond to. But I'll try my best. I apologize for that. It can be hard to express what you mean and get the other party to understand. It is the nature of communication... Okay, those are points that I did want to make explicitly clear. And yeah, duplication is redundancy. Not a backup. But redundancy does make it easier to restore when something does go wrong. And I understand the space issues. Though, just a heads up, the Seagate 8TB Archival disks may be a great use for this backup pool. They're meant for cold storage, so it may be perfect. Also, they're significantly cheaper than similar drives. The file placement rules are per pool (meaning each pool has it's own set of rules). The same applies to the balancers. That way, you have significant control and flexibility over each pool. For instance, you could use the "Ordered File Placement" balancer plugin on the backup pool to fill up the disks on at time. From there, the file placement rules specify which disk (in that pool) that a files end up (by specifying the folder or file, by name or wildcards). For instance, we had a ticket recently where a user wanted all the metadata on a specific disk (an SSD) and we helped set that up correctly (as the file placement rules can be confusing). This means if you want the same configuration, you'd need to set up the rules for both pools separately. The File Placement rules have an option for each rule, to "never allow files on other disks" or to allow files other disks if it's more than 90% (adjustable) full". There is also an "add new disks to this rule" option, that well, does what it sounds like it does. In the case of the disk failing, the rule will be disabled effectively, and allow placement on other drives. Depending on the specific rule and all the options, you would need to edit the rule to include the new/replacement disk, and then copy the contents back onto the pool. If the data on the drive is duplicated... there are couple of options here. And it depends on what is happening exactly. If the disk is marked as damaged by Scanner, then in most cases, it will attempt to move the data off of the disk onto other disks. You can "fine tune" or disable this behavior by using the "StableBit Scanner" balancer. As for what happens after the data has been moved.. if the rule has been updated to use the new disk, and only that disk, then it should attempt to rebalance the pool at the next pass (or immediately) and move that data back to a drive where it's not violating the File Placement rules. Also, it should notify you that the file placement is not optimal and want to rebalance the pool. Yes, you definitely should. Don't want to test this out in a live environment any sooner than you absolutely have to. Also, it's worth noting that duplication is also done "per pool". And I think I've answered everything. If I haven't let me know and I'll try to clarify further.

You are very welcome! And yeah, "seeding" the pool is essentially just moving the contents to a different location on the same disks. This means it takes minutes (if that) instead of hours (roughly 4 hours per 1TB to move under ideal conditions, IIRC). You can seed a large pool in less than half an hour (i've done so several times). As for moving the folders, you'd do so on the file system and ignore the dashboard. After doing so, run the "WSS Troubleshooter" and select the "Restore DrivePool Shares" option. This will "correct" the shared folders and use the new location on the pool. http://wiki.covecube.com/StableBit_DrivePool_Utilities

I'll ask Alex and get back to you with the answer. As for the ticket, it sounded like it was for us, so I wanted to be sure. And yeah, I know what you mean. Though, I do think it will work on Windows Server 2012R2. They list Windows 8 as compatible... so it should. And that's fantastic. I'm glad to hear it! And you are very welcome.

I have it installed in a VM, but have I used it extensively? No. However, so far, there isn't a whole lot to differentiate from Server 2012R2. Most of the differences I've seen are purely GUI based stuff. If there isn't any real changes under the hood, I'm not sure it's worth the upgrade.... At least for me, as I have 2012R2 Essentials already. As for support, ... I suspect that most Windows 8.1 driver should work on it just fine. At least at the moment.

I'm going to apologize now. I'm probably goign to miss/ignore some of the points you've brought up here. This is intentional, as I think you're asking mostly about drive failure and recovery. I'm going to cover THAT in detail, here. First, if realtime duplication is enabled, any data written to the pool that is duplicated is written in parallel to both disks. That means that it will immediately be duplicated. If realtime duplication isn't enabled, or if you've just seeded the pool, it will measure the contents and immediately start duplicating the contents of the pool (as needed). Depending on how much data you have, this can take hours or days even. Additionally, duplication is done as a background IO Priority, so it make take more time than straight file copying (to prevent a performance hit while this happens). Now, when a disk fails, if everything was duplicated, then you're fine. Just remove the missing disk from the pool. It will then immediately recheck the duplication and duplicate any files as needed. You can add a replacement disk at this point, if needed (or even beforehand). If you have unduplicated data, then that means that you will lose any files that were on the disk. Additionally, we (stableBit DrivePool) do not maintain an outside index of the data on the disks (as this would be very resource intensive). In this case, you'd need to use your other "data set" to recover you data. Additionally, if you manually remove a disk, before it fails, it will move all the contents off of the disk and then remove it. Alternatively, you can "duplicate later" which will move just the unduplicated data off of the pool, and then run a duplication pass and recheck the status of all of the files. And if you have StableBit Scanner installed, it will move data off of a disk if it is marked as damaged (eg, has bad/unreadable sectors). Optionally, you can enable this behavior for SMART errors (which include overheating errors). And there is an option to avoid placing new files on drives that have overheated. This should have answered most of your questions (if not all). If you need any clarification, if I missed any questions, or if you have any additional questions, don't hesitate to ask.

Unfortunately not. Right now, Alex is focusing mainly on getting StableBit CloudDrive out as soon as possible (after making sure it's fairly stable). Once he's done that, he'll probably start hammering away on that. Right now, it's most conceptual. However, we've talked about this issue (data integrity) at length (hours and hours), and about what features should be in it, and what all it should be able to do. Yes, that's mostly talk or "on paper". However, you should see how much of DrivePool and CloudDrive have been "on paper" before coding. Also, knowning what you want to do is a great place to start off with, for coding. And I do keep on pushing this topic, as it's very highly requested (if only via parity requests). And I agree, it would be fantastic. Also, I've added a note, to notify you as soon as we have a beta.

If that's the case, check the event viewer when this happens. Look for "Plug and play" errors, and disk errors. Chances are, you may see a "unexpected removal" or similar when you're experiencing the issues. The reason for this is that the USB spec (including v3) allows for random disconnects, and this can cause issues long term. If you have the option, use eSATA. It's a lot more stable, and should appear as a normal drive in the system.

You can absolutely do that. Just "seed" the pool with the existing contents and run the "WSS Troubleshooter" and use the "Rebuild DrivePool Shares" option. It should then function exactly like it was before. Otherwise, you'll need to juggle data around. http://wiki.covecube.com/StableBit_DrivePool_Q4142489 http://wiki.covecube.com/StableBit_DrivePool_Utilities And then you can absolutely map the shares. Yes, you can use the "File Placement Rules" to limit what files or folders end up on which disk. However, you need to use version 2.X of DrivePool to have access to this feature. http://stablebit.com/Support/DrivePool/2.X/Manual?Section=File%20Placement As for forcing which folders are duplicated where, the file placement rules would be the only way to do that. Also, StableBit DrivePool has no concept of "master" and "duplicate" file. Both files are the "master" file and may be used (or both used in conjunction). As for the drives, you should be fine. However, if they're the "1TB/platter" drives, you may want to consider replacing them anyways. I've had 5 ST3000DM001 start to go bad on me in the last six months). However, if you install StableBit Scanner, you should be much better off. DrivePool will pull information from Scanner, and can cause DrivePool to evacuate a problem drive. (you may want to enable the SMART options for the StableBit Scanner balancer as well). For the most part, there shouldn't be any reason to worry. And if you have StableBit Scanner installed, it should take care of everything for you. How dare you!!!! Just teasing. There is no problem with doing so. As for the file placement, again, make sure you have 2.X installed. Then open the balancing settings. There should be a tab. No, no there isn't a way to ensure where "duplicates" end up. As I mentioned above, ... it should clarify why. However, you could limit the contents of a folder to the two drives (one seagate and one hitachi). This is a better option than two pools. And much more simple.

Yes, querying SMART data can wake up the drive. As for how often it occurs without the throttling setting? Honestly, I'm not sure, I'll have to ask Alex (the developer). But I think it's "as needed" or once a minute. However, that's just a guess, and may be completely wrong. As for the ticket, I should have responded by now. If I haven't let me know the contact number and I'll respond as soon as I can. Regards

There are a few examples in the File Placement section of hte online manual: http://stablebit.com/Support/DrivePool/2.X/Manual?Section=File%20Placement Not a whole lot, but they should give you an idea of how they work.

Glad I could clarify that then. If you have any other questions, don't hesitate to ask.

To clarify here: StableBit DrivePool doesn't care about where the drives are mounted to. When accessing the drives, we use the full volume ID. This means that the drive can have a drive letter, be mounted to a folder (like what Drive Bender forces you to do, IIRC) or even not mounted at all. This means that you have an incredible amount of flexibility with the drives in the pool. And it means that adding disks to the pool doesn't wreck any existing setup (such as installed programs). And you can continue to use the disks as you please after adding them to the pool. However, this will count against the available space (and will show up as "Other" data). As for mounting the drives to a folder: http://wiki.covecube.com/StableBit_DrivePool_Q4822624 And StableBit DrivePool only allows a specific volume to be part of a single pool. You can repartition the drive and add the different volumes (partitions) to different pools though. And a big part of the reason that StableBit DrivePool restricts you in this way, is because of the balancing system. It's a core part of our software. Allowing a single disk to be parts of multiple pools would make the balancing engine significantly more complex (I couldn't even give an estimate). You'd have to account for the data for that pool and EVERY other pool on the disk and in the system. You go from having a system that is mildly complex to incredibly complex. And very hard to troubleshoot when things don't work right (which can be a PITA already). However, DrivePool has a different strategy when it comes to organization: File Placement Rules. You can specify which disk or disks a specific folder or file types end up on. You could lock the backup folder to a specific disk. Or all "MKV" files to a set of disks. In fact, we recently had a user that wanted to put all the metadata for his pool on an SSD. http://stablebit.com/Support/DrivePool/2.X/Manual?Section=File Placement Additionally, if you still want to map the folders to drive letters (Such as "X:\backup" to show up as drive letter "V:", for example), you can still do that. In fact, if Drive Bender is doing that, it's probably using "subst" in the background to do this. That or it's automatically mapping a network drive. In fact, if you want to do this, you could just map the network drive. If the folders are shared, that makes it simple. Just open "My Computer" and add a mapped drive. http://windows.microsoft.com/is-is/windows/create-shortcut-map-network-drive#1TC=windows-7 However, if you're not sharing the folders, and you're using the Pro or better version of windows, you can use the hidden administrative shares. If you're Pool drive is "X:", then use "\\localhost\x$\folder". And I apologize if this is too much information, or if I missed anything. I wasn't entirely sure what you were trying to get at, so I tried to include as much information as i could.

Thanks. I've flagged and stickied it.

Yes and no. It depends on the files you're creating and WHERE they are located, and if THAT folder is duplicated. If the folder is duplicated, then it writes to the SSD and a HDD if you only have one SSD/feeder disk. If the folder is not duplicated, then it will just write to the SSD.

There may be a firmware update to fix this issue, it appears: http://knowledge.seagate.com/articles/en_US/FAQ/207931en http://knowledge.seagate.com/articles/en_US/FAQ/223651en I would recommend that you clear any data off of the drive prior to updating firmware, as if something goes wrong, you can brick the drive and lose everything on it. Aside from that, yes, I have seen this (reported) before. The issue with the load cycle count is that the head is being parked. Meaning the drive is idle and then woken up. You need to figure out what is waking it up to fix this issue (and hope that a) you can, and that it helps). The first thing to do is to change some settings for StableBit Scanner. If you open the Scanner Settings, and go the "SMART" tab. Check the 'Throttle queries" option, and set this to 60 minutes (default). If this helps then leave the setting. Otherwise, you may want to consider contacting Seagate about replacing the drives or seeing if they have a firmware fix.

Oh, wow, it's back in stock! As for "if it's worth it", it really depends. If you went with WHS2011, you'd need to make sure you have the "UEFI/GPT" hotfix installed if you're backing up Windows 8+ machines that are in UEFI mode. However, as you've mentioned, you miss out on half of your RAM, which sucks. Worst case here, grab HyperV Server 2012R2 or VMWare ESXi and install WHS2011 as a VM. Yes, there are issues with doing that, but it would allow you to use all of your RAM, and could be a great way to easily upgrade in the future. As well, as run other VMs and test stuff out (put that future Xeon to good use). Though this does depend on the CPU and the hardware you grab. And yes the connector for Windows Home Server 2011 is compatible with WIndows 8 and 8.1. (It requires a hack for Windows 10 though, IIRC)

Are these disks on the Silicon Images card, by chance?

Yes and no. It depends on how you have your folder structure setup. For instance, you could use "\Videos\Movies\A*\*" to move all the moves that start with "A" to the specific disk. You can get somewhat complicated but the rules doesn't support anything like regex.

There is a simple and a complex way to do this. The simple way is to use the "Ordered File Placement" balancer. This fills up one (or two, when duplication is enabled) disk at a time. Also, it tries to keep the contents of a folder on the same disk. https://stablebit.com/DrivePool/Plugins The more complex way is to use the File Placement rules, and micromanage the folders: http://stablebit.com/Support/DrivePool/2.X/Manual?Section=File%20Placement

No, quite the opposite, actually. "File placement rules respect real-time file placement limits set by the balancing plug-ins."Checked means that the file placement rules will not place new files on drives if it violates the real time placement limiters. Unchecked means it ignores them. "Balancing plug-ins respect file placement rules."Checked means that the balancers (including the StableBit Scanner balancer) will not move files to a disk if it violates the file placement rules. Unchecked means that it will move the files however it wants. "Unless the drive is being emptied."Checked means that if Scanner or another balancer wants to empty the disk, it will disregard the file placement rules, if necessary. Definitely. As for White Label drives, they're not that bad. They definitely don't have as long as a warranty, but they should still be fine.

You are very welcome. Hopefully, it's a simple issue and can be fixed quickly. Also, just in case, could you run "fltmc" from an elevated command prompt and post the results here?