Christopher (Drashna)

Well, the "Computer_name.fios-router.local" shouldn't make a difference really.  This is more of a display issue (though you can disable the dns suffixes in the IPv4 config).
 
Aside from that, yeah, it may be issues with the hardware.
 
 
As for he software, yeah, the service runs in the background, even when not logged in. All the UI does is connect to the service (even for remote control, as it's routed though the service, basically). 

First, I am very sorry to hear about the hardware failure, as that is never a pleasant experience. 
 
 
As long as the old and new controller doesn't do anything funky to the disks, you should be able to just reconnect them, and StableBit DrivePool should recognize them.
 
However if StableBit DrivePool still lists them as missing, try resetting the settings:
http://wiki.covecube.com/StableBit_DrivePool_Q2299585B

This is a somewhat common issue. Specifically, the performance counters on the system may have become corrupted.
 
Do this:
http://wiki.covecube.com/StableBit_DrivePool_Q2150495
 
And it should fix the issue.

Sorry for the delay in getting you!  I thought I had replied to you already, but it looks like I didn't. I apologize for that!
 
I think the issue here is that the balancing is set to "do not balance".  Specifically, the File Placement Rules are part of the balancing system, and require a balancing pass to get things moved around. And from your initial post, it looks like balancing is disabled.
 
 
If you're using FlexRAID/SnapRAID/etc in conjunction with the pool, it maybe problematic for existing files... as you may need to enable this at least temporarily to get everything moved and placed properly. 
 
 
 
As for the trial period, I've created a trial extension for you, and have sent you an email for it. It will contain an Activation ID that you can use to extend the trial until Feb 15th. 

Unfortunately, we don't really have a "merge pools" option right now. It's something that has been requested, and we may add in the future, though.
 
However, for now, the quickest way to merge the pools?
 
 
Please read, and reread this section. If you're not 100% certain about the process, we can set up a remote support session to assist you with this.  If you would prefer that we help, then please contact me at "https://stablebit.com/Contact",reference the thread and let us know that you'd like to set up a remote support session. 
 
That said, here's how to do it, basically. 
 
Move the disks over.This will create two pools... Stop the StableBit DrivePool Service. (run "net stop drivepoolservice") Enable "Show Hidden Files" for the system. "Unseed" one of the pools (do this with the pool with the least number of disks). By this, I mean open the "PoolPart.GUID" folder (where "GUID" is a random sequence of letters and numbers).  You should see a folder and file layout that mirrors the pool (or part of it at least). Move the contents of the Poolpart.GUID folder out of this folder.This moves the contents out of the pool effectively, as the software uses these folders as the actual contents Once the PoolPart folder is empty, delete the folder. Repeat this for each of disks in the one pool Start the "StableBit DrivePool Serivce".  (run "net start drivepoolservice")It should cause the pool in question to "disappear", as there are no disks in that pool anymore. Add the disks to the existing pool. Stop the StableBit DrivePool Service again.  Put the contents of the disks into the newly created "PoolPart.GUID" folders Start the StableBit DrivePool Service again. Remeasure the pool (Pool options -> remeasure).

To clarify here (and mark as answered):
 
The Seagate Archive drives get great read speeds. But beacuse of how they work, they get atrocious write speeds.  
 
They're great for long term storage, "sneaker nets" and for the pool.  
 
But if you do use them with the Pool, you don't want them to be written to first. You will want to use the SSD Optimizer to write to other drives first. Be it SSDs or spinning HDDs.  
 
This way, you get good write speeds to the pool, and StableBit DrivePool will handle the horrible writes. And considering that StableBit DrivePool uses a background priority for file transfers, and it runs in the background, invisibly, this may work out VERY well. 
 
 
You can get the SSD Optimizer Balancer here:
https://stablebit.com/DrivePool/Plugins
 
 
 
 
As for performance:
For reads, I got about 160-190MB/s from the drives, consistently. (using large, sequential files, and using 64k allocation unit sizes when formatting the disk).
For writes, closer to 80MB/s but would stall frequently during writing, decreasing the overall speed.

Just remove it from the Add-Ins tab.  There should be no issue with doing so.
 
The reason for what you're seeing is how the WHS2011 add-ins are installed. The list in the dashboard is separate from the list in the control panel.  And they're maintained separately.
If you uninstall from the dashboard, it should normally remove the entry and the software.  But if you uninstall from the control panel, you need to manually "uninstall" it from the dashboard. 

Ah, okay, I think your post here was a bit clearer.
 
As for the chunk not getting changed once you deleted the file .... that's more to do with how NTFS works. In most cases, when you delete a file, the actual contents don't get altered until the sectors are reused. Or zero'ed out. The "pointer" in the file allocation table is just removed. That's how data recovery is able to rebuild files, by reading the raw contents of the disk and piecing it back together.
 
I suppose we could be aggressive about zeroing out unused space, but the issue with that, is that it may significantly increase the bandwidth used, just to do so. I've flagged this for Alex (The developer) for consideration.
However, using defrag utilities that support this may be a good stop-gap measure for the time being. (eg, thin provisioned, or the like). 

Do you mean that you have the shared folders on the drive, and you want to move it into the pool?
 
 
If so check out this:
http://wiki.covecube.com/StableBit_DrivePool_Q4142489
If you have any issues with that, run "services.msc" stop the "Server" service (and click "Yes" to stop any additional service). Then retry the above.
 
After doing so, download the WSS Troubleshooter utility. Run it on the server and select the "Rebuild DrivePool Shares" option. This will automatically reshare the pooled locations, bypassing the dashboard's issues with moving shares to locations with existing data. http://dl.covecube.com/WssTroubleshoot/Release/download/Wss.Troubleshoot_2.0.0.1.exe

Yes, please just disregard the error.    This is normal and expected ... for pretty much any volume in use.
 
Specifically:
The E:\PoolPart..... folder may be the pool, and it should handle the removal of the letter without any issue. 
As for the rest, the "$Extend" is NTFS metadata, and anything that is modifying that should be able to hand the change without any issues, as well.
 
 
And you may want to look at this link:
http://wiki.covecube.com/StableBit_DrivePool_Q4822624
 
Specifically, check out steps 9-11 (especially 11).

First, I'm sorry to hear about the drive issues. Been there, done that (ST3000DM001's .... 12 of them failed in about a six month period.... all "shelled" drives and all outside of the warranty period). 
 
 
There should be absolutely no issue with doing so. 
 
As long as the drives are passed through, they should appear in Windows just fine, and be picked up both StableBit Scanner and StableBit DrivePool just fine.
 
 
As for organization, you need to check out a couple of things:
http://wiki.covecube.com/StableBit_DrivePool_Q4822624
This way, you can mount the drives to folders, to make it easier to sort and organize (and you can access the drives directly, if needed).
 
After that, is StableBit Scanner:
http://stablebit.com/Support/Scanner/2.X/Manual?Section=Disk%20Settings
 
The "Disk Settings" section lets you specify a case and bay. THis shows up in StableBit Scanner (and you can group by case, and show the drive bay listed).
Additionally, this information will show up in both StableBit DrivePool and StableBit Scanner reports, making it much easier to identify drives. 

Considered it, absolutely. And we'd really love to sell a pre-built and preconfigured box.
However, the hardware market is very competitive, and we'd want a really nice product, if we released it. And something that is easy to manage. 
 
Beyond just our existing software, we'd need to add a lot to make it usable. 
 
Once Windows Nano Server is "out", we'll definitely re-evaluate it.

Try using the "Force Damaged Disk Removal" option.  This should skip any errors, and leave problem files on the drive.
 
 
You can use the "Drive Space Limiter" balancer to clear out the drive (uncheck the "duplicated" and "unduplicated" options for the disk in question). This will slowly balance the data off of the drive.
 
Alternatively, if you've used the force damage option, you can copy the contents of the "PoolPart" folder onto the pool, to get the skipped over data. 

Absolutely.  I wouldn't recommend it for a number of reasons.  Namely, the low end hardware may cause performance issues with accessing or streaming content.  Additionally, I wouldn't recommend using USB for any long term connection of drives, as it can cause issues (USB specs allow for periodic sudden disconnects of the drive, and that may happen... and over time, it can corrupt data, if it's being written when a disconnect occurs).
 
And yes, there are definitely others that have done this or similar (using net-boxes and the like).

Either version should work fine. Though, I'd recommend the public beta build.
 
And yes, this can be done "online". The only caveat here is that any program accessing the data should be stopped first. 
 
 
And yes, this all looks fine.

The drive letter being bumped shouldn't have caused this to occur, in the first place.  We use the Volume ID, not the drive letter to determine where the files go (as this doesn't change).
 
As for CloudDrive. you can set the upload threads to "0", and this will pause the upload (located in "Drive Options -> IO Performance".  You can then delete or move the content back into the pool, delete it, and then it should be okay.  Set the threads back to the previous number, and you should be good to go.

I'm not sure.
 
Run a burst test just in case. 
Otherwise, the "nuclear solution" is to reset the settings.
 
But see below:
 
 
Try the latest internal beta build:
http://dl.covecube.com/DrivePoolWindows/beta/download/StableBit.DrivePool_2.2.0.649_x64_BETA.exe
There have been some serious changes to the read striping and related code. It may fix the issue you're seeing.
 
Unfriend, you should try this out as well, as it may fix the issue for you as well. 

That's definitely odd.
 
Upgrading to the latest beta build may help with this:
http://dl.covecube.com/DrivePoolWindows/beta/download/StableBit.DrivePool_2.2.0.639_x64_BETA.exe
 
Otherwise, resetting the settings will most likely fix it:
http://wiki.covecube.com/StableBit_DrivePool_Q2299585B
(the pooled data, and the duplication settings will remain intact, but the balancing settings will be reset).
 
However, if upgrading didn't help, would you mind grabbing a few things before you reset the data?
http://wiki.covecube.com/StableBit_DrivePool_2.x_Error_Reports
http://wiki.covecube.com/StableBit_DrivePool_Service_Memory_Dump

Some files are initially created, but I believe that only the used space is what is stored on the provider. 

I'm guessing you're using version 2.5.1.3062 or before.
 
The beta version fixes this issue, specifically:
Windows Home Server 2011: http://dl.covecube.com/ScannerWhs2/beta/download/StableBit.Scanner_2.5.2.3102_BETA.wssx
Windows/Standalone: http://dl.covecube.com/ScannerWindows/beta/download/StableBit.Scanner_2.5.2.3102_BETA.exe
 
 
Specifically, this is a UI bug with rendering under Remote Desktop.

Alex has updated the BitFlock rules, so this should get SMART data now.
 
If you open the SMART data for one of the disks in the system, you should be able to manually update the BitFlock rules. Otherwise, you should see an update in the next seven days.

Nope.
 
The only files it creates is a ".covefs" folder in the root of the drive (which is "super hidden"), and ".copytemp" files for when it's balancing and duplicating data. 

For the most part, the File Placement rules should be what you want. 
 
For instance, create a rule for "\Videos\Movies\*" and enable it for just the drives you want. Make sure you set the "allow files to be placed on other drives..." setting, so that once the drive is full, it will place the files on other disks.
 
 
However, are you frequently deleting files (such as the music and TV shows)? If not, then this really shouldn't matter. The reason is that the SMR tech has issues more with rewriting files than fragmentation. 
If you're constantly adding files to the pool/drive and not actually deleting them, then there shouldn't be an issue here.
 
 
 
 
 
As for the rules, what do you mean specifically?
And you can can go to the "rules" tab and manually type them in.  This may be closer to what you want, anyways.

Was this a clean installation or an upgrade?
And if was an upgrade, to what version and from which version?
 
Okay. Could you uninstall the current version, and make sure that "C:\Program Files\StableBit\CloudDrive" is empty. 
If it's not, make sure you manually stop the services for it in "services.msc", use task manager to "end" the notification app, delete the directory, reboot and then reinstall?

Duplication is the priority. The code regarding it tries to respect the balancing setttings (including file placement rules), but will disregard them if it's not able to find a valid drive to place the files.
This is intential, as duplication is literally the most important feature here. As it should be.
 
 
 
As for the drives, Yes, StableBit DrivePool is "aware" of the physical disks.  It will ACTIVELY avoid placing duplicated data on the same physical disk, if you have two partitions on the same drive added to the pool.  This way, you don't lose data because we "did something stupid" basically (what's the point of duplicating the data if both copies are on the same disk!!). 
This is also why we don't support Dynamic Disks. It makes the detection significantly more complex, and would adversely affect performance.  That's coupled with the wierd and random issues that Dynamic disks have, especially when moving to other systems (the "import foreign disks" thing can fail, and I've had it happen to me .... it's not fun, as you've basically just lost your data because of this). 
 
 
 
And hopefully, everything stays stable and sane! And it definitely sounds like the failing drives were the issue.