Jump to content

Christopher (Drashna)

Administrators
  • Posts

    11328
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    338

Community Answers

  1. Christopher (Drashna)'s post in OMG I love the activation system was marked as the answer   
    We're glad to hear that you like it!
    There is a limit though (8 licenses per product, per activation ID, but that should be plenty for most)
    And all of the software includes the ability to deactivate the license on that system, so you can activate it on a new system. 
  2. Christopher (Drashna)'s post in unable to get past activation screen was marked as the answer   
    Posting in a ticket. 
    but upgrading to the latest public beta should fix this issue. 
  3. Christopher (Drashna)'s post in Establishing a pool over existing drives was marked as the answer   
    Yup, we highly recommend the "quick and dirty" method.  It works well, and is still valid.  
    Nothing has changed in regards to how we store the files, so by all means, do this and buy a license (I may be biased though )
     
    My recommendation is to enable duplication though. This does take up twice the amount of space for the data (as each file is stored on two different disks), but it means that if one fails, you don't lose a bunch of files.  And I know you can just re-get them, in many cases... but not always, or not quickly. 
  4. Christopher (Drashna)'s post in Blockchain Data OK on DrivePool? was marked as the answer   
    Should be fine, as far as I'm aware.  Unless it's doing something really weird... and even then, the latest beta should handle "weird" better. 
    But I would recommend enabling duplication for this data. You DEFINITELY wouldn't want to lose it! 
  5. Christopher (Drashna)'s post in Initial burn-in test for new drives? was marked as the answer   
    Well, glad you found us! 
     
    I do a full format (which writes 0s to the entire volume), and then let StableBit Scanner run a surface scan. That's it. 
    Also, all of my data is duplicated
     
    Caveat: I may be biased on the tools.
     
  6. Christopher (Drashna)'s post in Default Amazon Drive Directory - Drive Pool was marked as the answer   
    That's not surprising.  It's a common issue, ad likely due to Amazon relying on VSS support, which isn't supported on the pool.
  7. Christopher (Drashna)'s post in DrivePool measures the pool on every start was marked as the answer   
    Yes, this is normal.   When connecting or reconnecting a pool that has been offline, it will remeasure the pool, since we don't know if the contents have changed in any way. 
  8. Christopher (Drashna)'s post in Update to Fall Creators update x64 win 10 all pools gone! was marked as the answer   
    Uninstall the software, reboot, reinstall the software.
     
    This should fix the issue.
  9. Christopher (Drashna)'s post in OS Upgrade - Licencing? was marked as the answer   
    For StableBit Scanner, this only applies to the v1 product.  The v2 includes the ability to deactive the license. 
     
    To do so, open the settings (on the system it's installed, not over remote), and open the "licensing" tab.  From there, you can deactivate the license. 
  10. Christopher (Drashna)'s post in Yet Another Balancing/Measuring Question was marked as the answer   
    I'm not sure why the SSDs got filled, but probably because the other drives were too full at the time.  Pretty much the only reason why that would happen.
     
     
    That said, I would highly recommend installing the latest beta version: 
    http://dl.covecube.com/DrivePoolWindows/beta/download/StableBit.DrivePool_2.2.0.866_x64_BETA.exe
     
    There are a bunch of bug fixes in it, both for the measuring code, but also for the balancing code.  And installing this version will likely outright fix the issues that you're seeing. 
  11. Christopher (Drashna)'s post in Reallocated Sectors - Any General Rule when 2 replace drive? was marked as the answer   
    With the reallocated sectors, I'd replace the drive. Warranty or no. 
     
    That said, if you want to continue using the drive, I'd say run "chkdsk /b" on the drive, for a good, in depth scan of it.   
    Alternatively, you can use SpinRite as well.
     
     
    If you wish to use it in the pool, I'd recommend using the StableBit Scanner balancer or the Drive Usage Limiter balancer to only place duplicated data on the drive in question.  This way, if the drive does suddenly fail, you're not losing anything. 
     
     
     
    Otherwise, my personally rule of thumb is "one is too many".   Reallocated sectors shows that the drive is already experiencing problems.  I'd rather replace it outright and not use the drive for anything important. 
    That said, if the value is stable, then you should be fine (and you can "ignore current value" which will trigger again, if it increases).  However, if it's steadily or rapidly increasing, then this indicates a serious issue, and the drive should be pulled from the system immediately. 
  12. Christopher (Drashna)'s post in Do I need to include .covefs when used with snapraid? was marked as the answer   
    Only if you're mounting the drive to a folder on the pool.  If it's the other way around then, it doesn't affect the pool.
     
    And remember that this data is stored on 3 different disks.  You'd need to lose 3 for the data to be lost.  (this behavior is hardcoded and CANNOT be changed)
  13. Christopher (Drashna)'s post in Is it possible to move the cache to another drive? was marked as the answer   
    Detach the drive ("Manage Drive"), and then re-attach it, using the new drive for the cache (you may need to pen the "Advanced settings" section while attaching the drive.
  14. Christopher (Drashna)'s post in Can't create junction on the pool anymore was marked as the answer   
    Install the latest beta version, there are a number of fixes for this stuff, and it may fix the issue you're seeing.
    http://dl.covecube.com/DrivePoolWindows/beta/download/StableBit.DrivePool_2.2.0.798_x64_BETA.exe
     
    If not, then let me know
  15. Christopher (Drashna)'s post in Encrypted container & upload question was marked as the answer   
    Yeah, definitely simple.  And it works very well.
     
    Though, if you really do want an encrypted container (a la truecrypt), then StableBit CloudDrive does still work for that, and well.
  16. Christopher (Drashna)'s post in Does this have NFS support? was marked as the answer   
    No NFS support at the moment.   
     
    And yes, the WIndows File Share provider is Samba/SMB/CIFS.
  17. Christopher (Drashna)'s post in Pretty-boring Usage Question was marked as the answer   
    (post moved to the appropriate section).
     
    Well, to address the initial question,  just remove the bad drive.  StableBit DrivePool will handle things from there.  If there aren't enough disks to get back to the proper level of duplication, it will warn you.  But reducing the duplication level isn't necessary. 
     
     
    As for a "hot spare", this really isn't needed. Once the missing/failed drive is removed, StableBit DrivePool will take care of reduplicating the data.  Additionally, the StableBit Scanner balancer will "effectively" do this, by evacuating the contents of the drive, if it detects unreadable sectors. 
     
    Between these two things, there really shouldn't be a need for hot spares, as .... it should treat the entire rest of the pool as "hot spares". 
     
    If you want it to work more aggressively, enable evacuation for SMART warnings, as well. 
     
     
     
     
    Yeah, this happens so that if the issue is just a bumped USB cable or the like, the data won't get out of sync.  
  18. Christopher (Drashna)'s post in SSD Plugin question was marked as the answer   
    You're using multiple pools, correct?

    If so, then yes, that should absolutely work.
     
     
    And since you're not using duplication, no complications from that.  So, full speed ahead then.
  19. Christopher (Drashna)'s post in NTFS permissions on the root DrivePool - what is the Parent Object? was marked as the answer   
    This is normal, as the sub folder is NOT inheriting the permissions.
     
    You need the check the "Replace all child object permission entries [...]" option when setting the permissions.  
    Once you'e done this (it will take a while to complete, depending on the contents of your pool), you should see the "proper" permissions then.
     
     
    Also, make sure you add "SYSTEM" here, and give it full control.  This is for a number of reasons, but primarily to ensure that StableBit DrivePool has no problems with duplication or balancing (as the service runs in the system account)
  20. Christopher (Drashna)'s post in Understanding file placement was marked as the answer   
    First, thank you for your interest in our product(s)! 
     
     
    The default file placement strategy is to place files on the drive(s) with the most available free space (measured absolutely, rather than based on percentage). This happens regardless of the balancing status.   In fact, it's the balancers themselves that can (will) change the placement strategy of new files. 
     
    For what you want, that isn't ideal.... and before I get to the solution: 
     
     
     
    The first issue here is that there is a misconception about how the balancing engine works (or more specifically, with how frequently or aggressive it is).
     
    For the most part, the balancing engine DOES NOT move files around.   For a new, empty pool, balancing will rarely, if ever move files around.  Partly because, it will proactively control where files are placed in the first place. 
     
    That said, each balancer does have exceptions here.  But just so you understand how and why each balancer works and when it would actually move files, let me enumerate each one and give a brief description of them. 
     
    StableBit Scanner (the balancer). 
    This balancer only works if you have StableBit Scanner installed on the same system.  By default, it is only configured to move contents off of a disk if "damaged sectors" (aka "Unreadable sectors") are detected during the surface scan.  This is done in an attempt to prevent data loss from file corruption.  
    Optionally, you can do this for SMART warnings as well. And to avoid usage if the drive has "overheated". If you're using SnapRAID, then it may be worth turning this balancer off, as it isn't really needed Volume Equalization.
    This only affects drives that are using multiple volumes/partitions on the same physical disk.  It will equalize the usage, and help prevent duplicates from residing on the same physical disk. Chances are that this balancer will never do anything on your system.  Drive Usage Limiter
    This balancer controls what type of data (duplicated or unduplicated) can reside on a disk.  For the most part, most people won't need this.  
    We recommend using it for drive removal or "special configurations" (eg, my gaming system uses it to store only duplicated data, aka games, on the SSD, and store all unduplicated data on the hard drive)Unless configured manually, this balancer will not move data around.  Prevent Drive Overfill
    This balancer specifically will move files around, and will do so only if the drive is 90+% full by default. This can be configured, based on your needs. However, this will only move files out of the drive until the drive is 85% filled. This is one of the balancers that is likely to move data.  But this will only happen on very full pool.
    This can be disabled, but may lead to situations where the drives are too full. Duplication Space Optimizer.
    This balancer's sole job is to rebalance the data in such a way that removes the "Unusable for duplication" space on the pool.   If you're not using duplication at all, you can absolutely disable this balancer  
     
     
    So, for the most part, there is no real reason to disable balancing.  Yes, I understand that it can cause issues for SnapRAID. But depending on the system, it is very unlikely to.  And the benefits you gain by disabling it may be outweighed by the what the balancers do.  
     
    Especially because of the balancer plugins. 
     
     
    Specifically, you may want to look at the "Ordered File Placement" balancer plugin.  This specifically fills up one drive at a time.  Once the pool fills up the disk to the preset threshold, it will move onto the next disk. 
     
    This may help keep the contents of a specific folders together.  Meaning that it may help keep the SRT file in the same folder as the AVI file. Or at least, better about it than the default placement strategy.  This won't guarantee the folder placement, but significantly increases the odds.
     
    That said, you can use file placement rules to help with this.  Either to micromanage placement, or ... you can set up a SSD dedicated for metadata like this, so that all of the SRT and other files end up on the SSD.  That way, the access is fast and the power consumption is minimal. 
  21. Christopher (Drashna)'s post in Damaged sector on a hard drive - how to add drive back into pool? was marked as the answer   
    Well, StableBit DrivePool won't rebalance the pooled data onto the drive automatically.  This would only happen if one or more of the drives are more than 90% full, if the duplication was not optimal (eg, if you have "unusable for duplication" space), or there is another problem disk. 
     
     If you want to force the software to rebalance to use the drive, then you can install the "Disk Space Equalizer" balancer plugin. This will rebalance the data to equalize disk usage. 
     
     
    That said, you may want to try remeasuring the pool. Any "grey" data is generally "other" data and not considered pooled. 
  22. Christopher (Drashna)'s post in Duplication speed was marked as the answer   
    Duplication and balancing activity are not shown in the StableBit DrivePool UI, only access "through" the pool are shown.  
     
    This is a common request though, and may be added in the future. 
     
     
     
    As for the speed itself, this is entirely normal.  We use a background priority to duplicate and balance data, so this won't be as fast a a straight file copy.  Additionally, because there may be a lot of small files, this can (will) reduce the speeds of any transfer in general. 
     
    There are some advanced setting that can increase the priority (and thereforce may increase the speed), but this may impact overall performance. 
     
    You can do this temporarily, in the UI, by clicking on the ">>" button at the bottom (when it's balancing/duplicating). 
    Or you can set this permanently, by editing the advanced config file.
    http://wiki.covecube.com/StableBit_DrivePool_2.x_Advanced_Settings
    Set "FileBalance_BackgroundIO" and/or "FileDuplication_BackgroundIO" to "false" and reboot the system. 
  23. Christopher (Drashna)'s post in Unreadable first block/sector on WD easystore 8TB or false alarm was marked as the answer   
    This is most likely a "bug".  Specifically, some drives ... have some weird issues with how the data is reported.  It causes issues for the surface scan in released versions, unfortunately.
     
    Please try this version and rescan: 
    http://dl.covecube.com/ScannerWindows/beta/download/StableBit.Scanner_2.5.2.3126_BETA.exe
     
    To rescan, double click on the drive in question, click on the fourth button on the left side (with a green circle), and select "mark all as unchecked" (or something like that). 
     
    This should complete "properly". 
  24. Christopher (Drashna)'s post in How to decrypt cache was marked as the answer   
    I ... thought I'd posted here!  I'm sorry to for not doing so. 
     
     
    That said, Alex (the Lead Developer) has added the ability to "mount disconnected" drives, so that you should be able to access the data now. 
     
    that said, data *may* be missing here, if it wasn't all downloaded.  So this is explicitly for troubleshooting and data recovery purposes ONLY. 
     
    http://dl.covecube.com/CloudDriveWindows/beta/download/StableBit.CloudDrive_1.0.1.877_x64_BETA.exe
  25. Christopher (Drashna)'s post in Formatting Media server PC was marked as the answer   
    Correct, it's one license per PC.  Additional licenses are only $15 each though.  So you can get them for "dirt cheap"
     
    That said, you DO NOT need a license if you are solely using the software for remote control functionality. 
×
×
  • Create New...