Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Waterlooville, Hampshire, UK

RussellS's Achievements


Member (2/3)



  1. Thanks very much for clarifying that Shane, I wasn't aware those settings were there. I understand it a lot better now. Thanks again
  2. Thanks Christopher, That's the conclusion I came to when HD Sentinel showed the health percentage for one of my drives drop from 100% to 11% overnight and gave it around 10 days until it died. I panicked and replaced the drive immediately but then when I checked the supposedly faulty drive it was fine. In fact I formatted it and it is now in use in the Backup Server as we speak. OK, you've twisted my arm, I'll go for StableBit Scanner . As an existing customer I can get it cheaper than HD Sentinel as well so that's an added bonus. Thanks again for your help.
  3. Thanks Shane. So just to be sure, by having 'Do not balance automatically' ticked in Balancing settings the 'evacuation of data' feature will be disabled. Also, I was wondering if you or anyone else for that matter had any thoughts to help me decide between StableBit Scanner and HD Sentinel Pro to keep an eye on my drives. As I said earlier my Media Server has HD Sentinel Pro and it has worked very well and keeps me informed of any issues although it did recently report one of my drives suddenly dropped from 100% down to 11% overnight and warned of imminent failure. However after replacing the drive I then checked the reportedly failing drive with Scanner and it's reporting it as healthy albeit with a couple of non critical SMART warnings.
  4. Hi, I am currently evaluating StableBit Scanner to decide whether to purchase that or HD Sentinel Pro which I already have one license for on another system. However I have a question regarding Scanner that I cannot find the answer to in the FAQ or the forum. Firstly though let me just outline my system. I have two systems, a Media Server and a Backup Server both around 10TB in size. Both systems are running SnapRAID for parity protection and Drivepool. The SnapRAID parity is calculated on the Media Server every night at around 2am and then every Sunday at around 3am any added or changed files on the Media Server are backup up to the Backup Server and then SnapRAID parity is calculated on that. Due to the parity protection and the backup of data I have no need nor do I want any file duplication or any files moving between disks. It is for this reason that I was concerned about the following statement in the DrivePool FAQ regarding StableBit Scanner and a failing drive: I really don't want this happening at all and would just want Scanner to notify me of the failing drive so that if necessary I can just replace the drive and then either regenerate the drive data from the parity with SnapRAID or restore the data from the backup. However, I could not find any setting in either Scanner or DrivePool to disable this 'evacuation of data'. Is it possible for Scanner/DrivePool to just notify of problems but take no action itself. Thanks
  5. Just a quick update. I have found that the effected files had two copies on different physical drives in the PoolPart.xxx folders. I don't know how the duplicates got there but I'm sure this predates my use of DrivePool and probably originated when the drives were in a FlexRAID array. I have now deleted the duplicates and things are looking much better.
  6. Hi, I have come across an issue that is affecting a small number of files in the pool that I can't get to the bottom of. Basically, if I copy an affected file from the pool to another location (local or network) then the file in the destination has either a different 'date modified' attribute or it has a different file size. This was brought to my attention when my backup software kept backing up the same files because it detected that the destination file was different to the source file so it assumed the source file had been modified. At first I thought it was my backup software acting strangely but it turns out I'm getting the same results even if I copy the files manually. So I have done some testing and found that if I copy the file from the pool then I get the issue, however if I copy the same file from the original drives ;PoolPart.xxxx' folder then the destination file has the correct attributes and file size. Here are two example files that exhibit the behaviour. File 1. A JPEG file that is 42,718 bytes in size and has a modified date of 18 Dec 2015. When I copy it from the pool the destination file is 51,759 bytes in size and has a modified date of 13 Sep 2015. If I then copy the same file from the respective disk's PoolPart.xxx folder then the destination file's size & modified dates are exactly the same. File 2. A FLAC music file that is 78,461,914 bytes in size and has a modified date of 31 Jan 2017. When I copy it from the pool the destination file has exactly the same size but has a modified date of 23 Mar 2015. Once again, if I copy the same file from the respective drives PoolPart.xxxx folder then the destination file is exactly the same. I can only assume that when I copy from the pool then it is accessing a different file but I don't know how or why. Also, only 17 files out of approx 20,000 are effected. So any help would be very welcome. Thanks
  7. Thanks for your advice. As you say I'm sure it will settle down once it's 'sorted itself out'. That was what I found most confusing, I do have 'Duplication' turned off but it was still saying 'Duplicating'. It all seems rather confusing. I will do as you say and 'Re-Measure' and see what happens. Thanks for your help.
  8. Yeah, that's what I thought. 'Pool file duplication' does offer to enable it indicating that it is indeed turned off. Going back to my earlier question, in my screenshot where it says 'Unduplicated 1.82GB' and 'Other 9.68TB' what does 'Other' actually mean. It seems a bit vague.
  9. Thanks for clarifying that, at least I know I was doing the right thing. That's really good to know, thanks. I never thought about that but it makes perfect sense. I assume to turn balancing of by just ticking the box 'Do not balance automatically'. Just one more thing, I am in the process of migrating my backup server from FlexRAID over to SnapRAID/Drivepool and I'm a bit confused about the drive duplication. As I have everything parity protected AND backed up I have no need nor do I want any file or folder duplication done by Drivepool. However as you can see from this screenshot it is saying duplicating at the bottom and this seemed to take quite a long time considering it's not supposed to be duplicating anything. Also I don't know what it means where the little blue arrows are that says 'Un-duplicated target for rebalancing' when I have auto-rebalancing turned off. I just want to understand what this is telling me because it seems to be saying things contrary to the settings. The other thing I don't understand is under the pie chart of the storage pool it says 'Unduplicated 1.82GB' and 'Other 9.68TB'. What does 'Other' actually mean. I'm very confused so would really appreciated some insight so I can understand what it's telling me. Thanks
  10. Hi, I have a 10TB media server with SnapRAID and Drivepool and everything was fine until the other day when I was informed by Hard Disk Sentinel that one of my drives was critical and to back it up and replace immediately. When I came to replace the drive it became apparent that I didn't really understand how drivepool works so even though I stumbled my way through and it is all fine now I just want some information so that I understand it better for next time. So because I have the pool protected by SnapRAID and also I have the entire pool backed up weekly to a backup server I have file/folder duplication turned off in Drivepool. Having read the DP documentation I now understand that if I select 'Remove' next to one of the pool drives then it will attempt to move the data from that drive to the other drives in the pool before then removing the drive from the pool. However, in my situation I don't want any files moved off the drive because I'm backing it up to another drive and then replacing it or rebuilding the data an the new drive with SnapRAID. So what I want to know is what is the correct procedure to remove a drive that is still functioning from the pool without DP attempting to move any files around. I know I can just physically remove the drive from the PC and then DP will show it as missing and then you can just click remove but is this the correct procedure to use.
  11. Ah, I understand now. So the initial manual copy of the data to the new drive is 'just in case'. Then I add the new drive to the pool, remove the old drive from the pool at which point DrivePool should copy all the data to the PoolPart.xxxx folders on the other drives (including the new one) and then once that's done and verified I can delete my original copy. I didn't realise it would do that. Thanks again.
  12. Thanks for your advice. In the procedure you suggest, at what point do I copy the data from the old drive to the new one. Do I do that before step 1 so the new drive already has the data on it. Also, at step 2 where I remove the old drive in the GUI will DrivePool not then do what you said later in your post and 'try to move the files from the HDD-to-be-removed to the other disks in the Pool.'
  13. Hi, I am a fairly recent DrivePool user having migrated from FlexRAID. I have a 10TB media server with 4x3TB data drives and 1x3TB parity drive. At the moment I'm not using any RAID functionality until I've understood DrivePool properly and then my plan is to setup SnapRAID (unless anyone has a better suggestion). So as it stands at the moment I just have the 4x3TB data drives pooled and am not using the parity drive at the moment. I also run HD Sentinel Professional to monitor the drives and inform me of any issues etc. Anyway, the reason for my post. HD Sentinel has informed me that one of my data drives is starting to go bad and I want to swap it out. I have gone through the DrivePool manual but it only seems to mention removing a drive from the pool or adding a new drive to the pool but I couldn't find anything specific to replacing a bad drive so I wanted to ask for some clarification here. The data on the failing drive is still accessible so I am currently copying all the data from the PoolPart.xxxx folder on the failing drive to a new 3TB drive. I can see 2 possible options: 1.) Should I copy the PoolPart.xxx folder itself and then just physically remove the old drive and fit the new one in it's place and then assume DrivePool will see the same PoolPart.xxxx folder and just carry on as before. 2.) Should I copy just the contents of the PoolPart.xxxx folder to the new drive and then in the DrivePool GUI remove the failing drive from the pool, swap the drives over and then add the new drive to the pool. I assume then DrivePool will create a new PoolPart.xxxx folder on the new drive which I can then move the copied data into. ...or is there another option that I'm missing. Thanks for any help. Russell
  14. That's good enough for me. I have absolutely no issue with paying for software when there is a good reason to have it over a cheaper or open source alternative. So, if this bug stops parity calculation how do you get around it. Is this something I should be worried about.
  15. Hi again, I've been getting my head round the command structure etc for SnapRAID and was just wondering if there was any particular reason why you use DrivePool instead of the 'Pool' feature already built in to SnapRAID. Thanks
  • Create New...