Shane

I don't know if it's related, but Stablebit just had a Microsoft-related issue with their cloud infrastructure that lasted several hours. If you're still having problems you might want to get in touch with Stablebit via the contact form.

If you're having licensing issues, please use the Contact form to request help directly from Stablebit. ... once their server comes back up. Ouch. P.S. I've rebooted my home server (YOLO) and DrivePool and Scanner are still showing as licensed, and I can reach the stablebit.cloud site, so @PBUK and @Tullerian perhaps try again in case the part affecting you is working again? EDIT: this link https://status.stablebit.cloud/ shows that some services are down and has the following message at the top:

It's come up a few times over the years. This post mentions reasons why DP might leave empty (and "empty") folders, while this post mentions a really neat trick with robocopy that can be used to clean them up if you decide you want them gone anyway - note that if you use it but you've got any empty folders you actually want to keep you'll have to exclude them somehow (e.g. via the /XD switch). Hope that helps.

Yes, that's correct. If you're using Snapraid to protect your pool then normally you'd want DrivePool's balancing plug-in for Scanner either turned off or at least set to not move files out.

If it's happening on a regular schedule you might want to check if anything is running in the background (e.g. via Windows Task Scheduler) at those times? Otherwise I'd suggest using the Contact form to request support from Stablebit.

By default a file will normally be copied into the pool using whichever drive within that has the most free space at the time, so if they're all empty it would presumably use the 10TB drives first (and this is the behaviour I see using FreefileSync to back up files to my pool). How much RAM does the sending and receiving computer(s) have? Do any of the suggestions at https://www.makeuseof.com/insufficient-system-resources-exist-error-windows/ help? I also found this topic https://freefilesync.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=8868 in the FFS forums, in which the OP discovered the issue was a faulty RAM stick in their computer, so that's another possibility. Another poster suggested editing the LanManServer record in the registry. Note that if editing the registry doesn't help, I recommend reverting the change in case it causes other issues later.

It would complain every time it does a health check of the pool, and offer to delete all the older file(s) under the assumption that there was an error in duplicating the newer instance of the file across the pool, but it won't delete any automatically unless you tick the box that tells it to do so for future checks. However note too that if you yourself update the "single" file that shows up in the pool (or move it out of the pool) then only one of the actual files in the poolparts will actually be moved/updated and the rest will be lost. E.g. if you manually put test.txt (contains the word "apple") into d:\poolpart1 and manually put test.txt (contains the word "orange") into e:\poolpart2 and then you open p:\test.txt you might get the one that contains "apple" or you might get the one that contains "orange", and if you moved p:/test.txt to c:/test.txt or edited it to say "banana" then only one would be moved/edited and the other one would be lost or overwritten. (at least, when read-striping is off; I'm not sure whether something more odd might happen if read-striping is on and the files involved are large). And thankyou!

Q: I understand now that these apparently surprising duplicated files in my pie chart were in fact mine from the beginning. Is it then a problem to leave them there ? If they're actually duplicates, i.e. the exact same file with the same path in different poolparts, then no problem. Q: I then don't quite understand the duplication warning that I get during the check : what can be the "duplicated files mismatching parts" ? I also noticed that when theses duplicates files just have the same name but are not really the same binary file (for example 2 different videos with the same name), then DrivePool just shows one of the two files in the pool. Which one does DrivePool choose ? Is this the case seen by DrivePool as a "duplicated files mismatching parts" case during the check ? Yes, this indeed occurs when different files with the same path and name have been moved into different poolparts. For example, let's say you have a photo of a cat saved as d:\photos\cute24.jpg and a photo of a dog saved as e:\photos\cute24.jpg and you manually move them into the hidden poolpart folder on the respective drives like so: d:\photos\cute24.jpg <- cat -> d:\poolpart1\photos\cute24.jpg --> shows up in the pool as p:\photos\cute24.jpg e:\photos\cute24.jpg <- dog -> e:\poolpart2\photos\cute24.jpg --> also shows up in the pool as p:\photos\cute24.jpg If you had moved the cat photo into p:\photos the normal way (d -> p) and then moved the dog photo into p:\photos the normal way (e -> p), Windows would pop up a warning that there's already a file there with that name and ask if you wanted to replace it). But by accessing the hidden poolparts directly (d -> d:\poolpart and e -> e:\poolpart) you bypass the normal safety procedures. As to which one DrivePool chooses to show, I believe it would be whichever drive that DrivePool accesses first (which would depend on various factors). Q: And finally one last question : how to know the physical path of a file seen in the pool ? (i.e. when browsing the pool, how to know on which physical disk is a file located ?) There are various ways, for example: Manually check the equivalent path in each hidden poolpart folder. Open a command prompt run as an administrator and enter dpcmd get-duplication filepath where filepath is the fully pathed name of the file ( e.g. dpcmd get-duplication "p:\photos\cute pets\oscar the turtle.jpg" ) <-- note this shows the volume numbers, not the drive letters, so you'd have to look it up in Windows Disk Management or similar to find the corresponding drive letters (dpcmd does this because DrivePool can pool volumes without them requiring a drive letter). Use a tool which can quickly scan lettered NTFS volumes and show all files on all drives that match the search string, e.g. Everything by Voidtools can do this.

If you're manually moving new files into the pool via the hidden poolpart folders as per Q4142489, it is up to you to ensure they do not overlap existing folders/files in the pool. This is because DrivePool's duplication works via having the same file exist in the same path on multiple drives in the pool. For example, say you have a pool P consisting of drives D and E, whose contents are as follows: d:\poolpart.1\folder1\file1 --> p:\folder1\file1 <-- this is a duplicated file d:\poolpart.1\folder1\file2 --> p:\folder1\file2 d:\poolpart.1\folder1\file3 --> p:\folder1\file3 e:\poolpart.2\folder1\file1 --> p:\folder1\file1 <-- this is a duplicated file e:\poolpart.2\folder1\file4 --> p:\folder1\file4 e:\poolpart.2\folder2\file1 --> p:\folder2\file1 e:\poolpart.2\folder2\file2 --> p:\folder2\file2 If you then had a new drive F you wanted to manually seed into the pool as per Q4142489, with new (i.e. different to the above) content as follows: f:\folder1\file2 - - -> f:\poolpart.3\folder1\file2 f:\folder2\file3 - - -> f:\poolpart.3\folder2\file3 You would have to first change the name of F's folder1, folder2, file2 and/or file3 before moving \folder1\file2 into any hidden poolpart as otherwise it would overlap with the existing \folder1\ and \folder2\ as follows: d:\poolpart.1\folder1\file1 --> p:\folder1\file1 <-- this is a duplicated file d:\poolpart.1\folder1\file2 --> p:\folder1\file2 <-- this existing file is in conflict with a new file d:\poolpart.1\folder1\file3 --> p:\folder1\file3 e:\poolpart.2\folder1\file1 --> p:\folder1\file1 <-- this is a duplicated file e:\poolpart.2\folder1\file4 --> p:\folder1\file4 e:\poolpart.2\folder2\file1 --> p:\folder2\file1 e:\poolpart.2\folder2\file2 --> p:\folder2\file2 f:\poolpart.3\folder1\file2 --> p:\folder1\file2 <-- this new file is now in conflict with an existing file f:\poolpart.3\folder2\file3 --> p:\folder2\file3 <-- this new file is now in the same folder as two existing files @Christopher (Drashna) I recommend that the Q4142489 wiki entry should mention this explicitly; e.g. by instructing the user in step 4 to "First, check that the folder structure you intend to move into the pool does not already exist in the pool, unless your goal is to merge the content of those folder structures together."

Perhaps you could ask Stablebit for an extension of the trial, to test clouddrive with idrive again, via the contact form?

The method would work, though you'd want to ensure the old drives weren't reconnected later to the drivepool computer without either stopping the DrivePool service and renaming the hidden poolpart folder (e.g. just put an 'x' in front of 'poolpart') on the drive you plan to swap out before shutting the computer down to physically swap out that drive or renaming/removing the hidden poolpart folder on the old drive via another computer after the drive is taken out of the drivepool computer to avoid any potential issues shoud the old drive(s) be later reconnected to the drivepool computer.

Have you tried ticking "Force damaged drive removal" when clicking Remove presents you with the options? I would also tick "Duplicate files later"; it will still copy files that aren't already on the remaining disks.

This thread by MitchC goes into the file indexing issues with DrivePool. TLDR is DrivePool currently generates its own file index table for files opened from the pool, held in RAM, with each file being assigned an ID incrementing from zero as they are opened (edit: the first time after each boot), renamed or moved within the pool, which is not how NTFS does it (a file should retain its FileID regardless of being renamed or moved within a volume and do so regardless of reboots), which means until this is fixed any program that assumes normal FileID behaviour from a pool drive (because DrivePool presents the pool as a NTFS volume) may behave in an unplanned manner.

It's the same for both local and cloud drives being removed from a pool: "Normally when you remove a drive from the pool the removal process will duplicate protected files before completion. But this can be time consuming so you can instruct it to duplicate your files later in the background." So normally: for each file on the drive being removed it ensures the duplication level is maintained on the remaining drives by making copies as necessary and only then deleting the file from the drive being removed. E.g. if you've got 2x duplication normally, any file that was on the removed drive will still have 2x duplication on your remanining drives (assuming you have at least 2 remaining drives). With duplicate files later: for each file on the drive being removed it only makes a copy on the remaining drives if none already exist, then deletes the file from the drive being removed. DrivePool will later perform a background duplication pass after removal completes. E.g. if you've got 2x duplication normally, any file that was on the removed drive will only be on one of your remaining drives until the background pass happens later. In short, DFL means "if at least one copy exists on the remaining drives, don't spend any time making more before deleting the file from the drive being removed." Note #1: DFL will have no effect if files are not duplicated in the first place. Note #2: if you don't have enough time to Remove a drive from your pool normally (even with "duplicate files later" ticked), it is possible to manually 'split' the drive off from your pool (by stopping the DrivePool service, renaming the hidden poolpart folder in the drive to be removed - e.g. from poolpart.identifier to xpoolpart.identifier - then restarting the DrivePool service) so that you should then be able to set a cloud drive read-only. This will have the side-effect of making your pool read-only as well, as the cloud drive becomes "missing" from the pool, but you could then manually copy the remaining files in the cloud poolpart into a remaining connected poolpart and then - once you're sure you've gotten everything - fix the pool by forcing removal of the missing drive. Ugly but doable if you're careful.

Check for hidden, possibly system, folders on the disk that might have been created by chkdsk, e.g. see https://superuser.com/questions/42202/how-to-recover-folder-converted-to-file-by-check-disk - particularly the replies https://superuser.com/a/1014010 and https://superuser.com/a/1535688 may help.

Anything over zero isn't good. What does it display when you click on the underlined warning for each disk?

The default DrivePool balancing setting when Scanner is also installed is to evacuate any drive that Scanner detects as damaged, as a precaution to prevent possible/further loss of data. Scanner may be providing information about the reason for the damage, e.g. SMART warnings, and/or it may offer to attempt a fix, e.g. for file system issues. If it's not offering a SMART warning and it's not offering a fix, you could indeed try removing, formatting, scanning and re-adding the drives. You may find that DrivePool encounters problems removing the drives from the pool depending on the type of damage, at which point it'll tell you and you can decide how to proceed. If the problem is fixed and the drives are viewed as healthy again according to Scanner, they will be used again by DrivePool.

You can just use the pool as you normally would while DrivePool takes care of things in the background (e.g. balancing). DrivePool will "lock" (make read-only) the pool if it detects a problem (e.g. if one of the drives in the pool goes missing).

Likely very little difference versus plugged directly into the motherboard. It is possible to evacuate/move files much faster if you don't mind stopping the DrivePool service while you manually move them yourself (from hidden poolpart to hidden poolpart) then restarting the service and requesting a re-measure. Basically a tradeoff between speed and comfort, if that makes sense.

I think I'd suggest making a support request.

For requesting the developers add a feature, you can use the Contact form.

My initial suspicions to check would be: faulty USB device, faulty or overloaded USB port/chip, faulty or underpowered PSU.

Honestly don't know; I was hoping to find some time to create a testbed and experiment using Local Disk providers as a stand-in (since I can toggle the VM volume read-only and see what happens) but this past week has been hectic and I needed sleep more - and I still couldn't be sure that Local Disk == Google Drive in terms of provider behaviour. If I had to guess the potential outcomes it would be similar to unexpectedly losing the connection? Frankly I'd suggest finishing moving away before the deadline arrives or ensuring you have duplication/backups elsewhere; at the very least I'd suggest don't have anything in the upload queue when the date arrives and mark the drive read-only yourself beforehand.

If you're simply wanting to keep the data that's already in your pool, just Add the new drive first then Remove the old drive second; DrivePool will automatically move the data to whatever drive(s) has the most free space (so most likely your new drive) as part of the process. If it turns out there isn't enough room on the remaining drive(s) it'll just stop at that point, you won't lose anything. VapechiK's method above is for if you want to move files from outside your pool to inside your pool as absolutely quickly as possible when the drive(s) those files are on are going to be added to the pool, and can also be used (with some changes) if you want to move data from an old pool drive to a new pool drive for the same reason (the Remove function is slower since it has to keep all of the pool's features going while moving the data in the background). TLDR: if you're not in a rush, Add the new drive first then Remove the old drive second, DrivePool will take care of moving your pooled data and you can keep using your pool for other things while it does it.

Does uninstalling then reinstalling DrivePool help at all? If it doesn't, I'd suggest requesting help via the Contact form if you haven't already.