locked
Drive Extender Not Migrating Data

    Question

  • I did a clean install of WHS with PP1 Beta Integrated in a VM on a single hard drive.  Then I added some files to the shares.  Afterwards, I added a second drive.  I expected Drive Extender to move the data from the primary drive to the secondary drive at some point.  However, that hasn't happened yet (and it's been several hours, plus several reboots).

     

    Also, after adding the secondary drive, I enabled Folder Duplication on one of the shares and it copied the data to the secondary drive (as expected).  However, I then turned off Folder Duplication on the share and instead of deleting the copy from the primary drive, it deleted the copy from the secondary drive (once again, leaving all of my data on the primary drive).  Has anyone else noticed this?  Is this normal for Power Pack 1?  (It's definitely not normal for RTM.)

    samedi 21 juin 2008 23:01
    Modérateur

Réponses

  •  fladtheimpaler wrote:


    Guys I assure you I am not happy about this issue at all, but Ken's post puts me at ease.   As long as the Developers acknowledge this is an issue, and agree it needs to be addressed that is all we can ask.  

    Remember MS needs to get PP1 out the door as there is a critical data corruption fix that many non forum\connect users are still vulnerable to.

    PP1 is already at RC4.   Even a small code change at this stage of the game would trigger an entire series of regression tests, and from what I can tell addressing this problem would NOT be a small code change.   

    At this stage an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

    The best we can all do right now is be aware of how DE is working with PP1 and plan accordingly (IE add another disk BEFORE data is forced to fill the Primary Data Partition) OR if using Vista be ready to copy files in data chunks sized less than the ammount of free space on the primary data partition until a proper fix is provided.  
      
    We can *** all we want about this issue and make this thread 30 pages long, but in the end the problem will still be there.




     

    flad-the-impaler (one of my favorite sigs of all time ...),

     

    Great Post !!!  The Windows Home Server team is well aware of this.  Multiple people from the team read the forums every day, sometimes we listen and let the community figure out what the team should do about certain issues.  As you said, we want to get Power Pack 1 "out the door"

     

    We listen to you guys, you all make the product better, you all make the product what you think it should become.  The Windows Home Server team is VERY customer focused.  We listen, we prioritize, we code, we test, we plan to make continuous improvements for a LONG time.

     

    best,

     

    Todd Headrick

    Product Planner

     

    p.s. keep all of the great feedback and passion coming ....!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    jeudi 10 juillet 2008 04:09

Toutes les réponses

  • Kariya

    I am on Power Pack 1 RC 4 and I am having the same issue.   My WHS has 7 drives.    The Primary Data partition remains at 87% full, meanwhile there is a new drive in there with 465 GB of free space reading as 0% full in disk management add in.   The WHS has gone through many balancing cycles.     I also did a major data dump to the WHS as a test and when doing a file copy it does push new data to this drive.

    I saw a post by T. Hendrick where he observed USB\External drives not being treated equal as internal drives when it comes to balancing\migration which I hope is not the case.

    I have created a connect issue on this -
    354152, please feel free to chime in with any input you have.

    Impaler
    dimanche 29 juin 2008 15:35
  •  fladtheimpaler wrote:
    Kariya

    I am on Power Pack 1 RC 4 and I am having the same issue.   My WHS has 7 drives.    The Primary Data partition remains at 87% full, meanwhile there is a new drive in there with 465 GB of free space reading as 0% full in disk management add in.   The WHS has gone through many balancing cycles.     I also did a major data dump to the WHS as a test and when doing a file copy it does push new data to this drive.

    I saw a post by T. Hendrick where he observed USB\External drives not being treated equal as internal drives when it comes to balancing\migration which I hope is not the case.

    I have created a connect issue on this -
    354152, please feel free to chime in with any input you have.

    Impaler

     

    I already bugged it and the WHS team reported this as "by design".  (Here is my bug report.)  Frankly, IMO, this is more than a little disconcerting.  It's now cutting into the "landing zone" "by design".

     

    EDIT:  When you say you did a major data dump, how much was it?  Was it significantly more than the free space on your primary drive?  (Just wondering if MS got rid of the "landing zone" concept completely in PP1, which, if they did, then all is well Smile  .)

    dimanche 29 juin 2008 19:41
    Modérateur
  •  kariya21 wrote:

     

    I already bugged it and the WHS team reported this as "by design".  (Here is my bug report.)  Frankly, IMO, this is more than a little disconcerting.  It's now cutting into the "landing zone" "by design".


    I will look into this for a more thorough explanation as soon as I get back to the office tomorrow morning for you. I apologize for any lack of information regarding your bug and as to why it was resolved as it was.  

    dimanche 29 juin 2008 20:00
  • By Design?    Then why did I purchase a new 750GB drive with 32MB Cache specifically to act as the primary OS drive if its just gonna get filled up like all the rest of the drives?   

    All 6 of my drives including the OS drive are at 95% utilization.   I wasnt concerned about this while I was migrating all my data over figuring as I added empty drives everything would balance out across all the drives.

    I copied 160GB of new data and after about 10GB i saw the empty drive filling.  I then cancelled the copy and deleted this data off the server.  

    The drive went back to 0%, and nothing has been moved to the drive since!

    If this is by design i am WAY confused and why wasn't this documented anywhere?  

    What if I want to do a giant file copy to the WHS?   Now that my landing zone is almost full what is going to happen?

    I want the truth!  
    dimanche 29 juin 2008 20:01
  •  Jessep Bangham [MS] wrote:
    I will look into this for a more thorough explanation as soon as I get back to the office tomorrow morning for you. I apologize for any lack of information regarding your bug and as to why it was resolved as it was.  

     

    Thanks Jessep!

     

    (The only way I can see how it could be by design is if, with Power Pack 1 installed, the "landing zone" concept went the way of the Dodo bird. Wink  )

    dimanche 29 juin 2008 20:03
    Modérateur
  • Flad, as I replied just moments before your post, I will be looking into this for everyone and I will post any information I am able to here tomorrow. I'm sorry for the current hassle and hope to get all of you some more information shortly. 
    dimanche 29 juin 2008 20:04
  •  kariya21 wrote:
     

    Thanks Jessep!

     

    (The only way I can see how it could be by design is if, with Power Pack 1 installed, the "landing zone" concept went the way of the Dodo bird.   )


    Well, we'll find out soon I suppose. I just want to help in any way I can so thank you for bringing up this problem here so I could look into it further! Smile 
    dimanche 29 juin 2008 20:05
  •  fladtheimpaler wrote:
    By Design?    Then why did I purchase a new 750GB drive with 32MB Cache specifically to act as the primary OS drive if its just gonna get filled up like all the rest of the drives?   

    All 6 of my drives including the OS drive are at 95% utilization.   I wasnt concerned about this while I was migrating all my data over figuring as I added empty drives everything would balance out across all the drives.

    I copied 160GB of new data and after about 10GB i saw the empty drive filling.  I then cancelled the copy and deleted this data off the server.

     

    That's interesting.  It sounds like there is a fundamental change to the "landing zone" concept then.  Do you know how much free space was on your primary drive when you started the 160 GB copy?

     

     fladtheimpaler wrote:
    The drive went back to 0%, and nothing has been moved to the drive since!

    If this is by design i am WAY confused and why wasn't this documented anywhere?  

    What if I want to do a giant file copy to the WHS?   Now that my landing zone is almost full what is going to happen?

    I want the truth!  

    dimanche 29 juin 2008 20:06
    Modérateur
  • kariya, impaler,

     

    Can confirm simular behaviour in my VPC 2 disk system. Added validation report to feedback ID 354152.

    Theo.

     

    [EDIT]  Oh boy...

    was just adding a validation report, then got a browser refresh of post....

    By design eh..?

    dimanche 29 juin 2008 20:07
    Modérateur
  • Jessep
    Thanks for looking into this for us!   Either the landing zone concept has been completely scrapped at which point I question what the primary data partition is even used for now, or there is a bug here with PP1.  Please also refer to the connect issue I created last night.
    Impaler
    dimanche 29 juin 2008 20:07
  • Kariya
    I think its too close to call.    Its a 750gb drive.    The WHS console reports the space as 698GB and 87% full.   87% of 698 is 607gb so that leaves approximately 91GB free.    I started the copy of a 160GB data set and it did not complain.   So I don't know where that leaves us.  
    Impaler
    dimanche 29 juin 2008 20:13
  • Thanks again Jessep!

    Also looking forward to any additional information.

    Theo.
    dimanche 29 juin 2008 20:18
    Modérateur
  •  fladtheimpaler wrote:
    Kariya
    I think its too close to call.    Its a 750gb drive.    The WHS console reports the space as 698GB and 87% full.   87% of 698 is 607gb so that leaves approximately 91GB free.    I started the copy of a 160GB data set and it did not complain.   So I don't know where that leaves us.  
    Impaler

     

    Were you copying from Vista or XP?  (Vista should have given you an error message immediately.)

    dimanche 29 juin 2008 20:35
    Modérateur
  • I ran the copy from XP Pro SP2.  

    This house is a "No Vista" zone. 
    dimanche 29 juin 2008 20:38
  •  fladtheimpaler wrote:
    I ran the copy from XP Pro SP2.  

    This house is a "No Vista" zone. 

     

    Ahh, I see. Wink

     

    The only way to know for sure would be to copy more data than available free space.  Unfortunately, my PP1 machine is VM on a drive with very little space (so I can't copy enough data to test it).  Any chance you could try the copy again (and let it go until it either completes or errors out)?

    dimanche 29 juin 2008 20:40
    Modérateur
  • Sure I will try it again and let the full 160gb copy over.  I do not think this will fail however as the new drive was slowly filling.  Looking at the Disk Management plug in during the copy I could clearly see disk activity on the System drive and the empty drive so I think it is still using the primary drive as a landing zone and them migrating the data over to the new empty drive.  It seems to me there is some sort of bug or logic issue with the disk balancing component.   

    I have read as you were indicating Vista and XP handle initial file copies differently.    I really think your initial connect issue was closed by mistake and the person who looked at it was not understanding the issue completely.  

    I will start the copy now and let you know how it goes.   160gb will take some time however...
    dimanche 29 juin 2008 20:55
  •  fladtheimpaler wrote:
    Sure I will try it again and let the full 160gb copy over.  I do not think this will fail however as the new drive was slowly filling.

     

    Based on what you said before, that's my thought as well.  (However, I think Vista would fail immediately since it checks for total free space before copying and it would only see 91 GB free in your case.)

     

     fladtheimpaler wrote:
    Looking at the Disk Management plug in during the copy I could clearly see disk activity on the System drive and the empty drive so I think it is still using the primary drive as a landing zone and them migrating the data over to the new empty drive.  It seems to me there is some sort of bug or logic issue with the disk balancing component.

     

    Did you look at the new empty drive to see which files were arriving on it?  Are they all new files?  Or are some of the old files arriving as well (which I doubt)?

     

     fladtheimpaler wrote:
    I have read as you were indicating Vista and XP handle initial file copies differently.    I really think your initial connect issue was closed by mistake and the person who looked at it was not understanding the issue completely.

     

    Perhaps.  We'll have to wait and see what Jessep finds out tomorrow.

     

     fladtheimpaler wrote:
    I will start the copy now and let you know how it goes.   160gb will take some time however...

    dimanche 29 juin 2008 21:12
    Modérateur
  • OK check this out.

    This is the layout that disk management add in reports.  (No Disk 2 is reported i didnt miss it)

    Disk 0 System 87% used
    Disk 1 98% used
    Disk 3 81% used
    Disk 4 0% used (Newly added drive)
    Disk 5 95% used
    Disk 6 98% used
    Disk 7 95% used

    It appears since some backups were purged off the system Disk 3 had some space cleared up as last night it was at 9x% used.   

    I started the file copy by queuing up 189gb in teracopy.    The data is copying and its filling Disk 3! meanwhile Disk 4 has 461GB free space!

    So basically with PP1 it looks like it tries to fill every disk and then move onto the next one?   I bet it waits until this Disk 3 is 95% full or greater before it touches Disk 4.     


    dimanche 29 juin 2008 21:15
  •  

    Hi,

    I am getting a bad feeling on this....

    My VPC WHS reports a 143GB storage free from a total of 190GB. Hmmm.

    Disk#0 (system) has a data partition reporting a size of 97,17GB with 72,13GB free.

    Disk#1 (data) reports a size of 73,23 with 68,92GB free as a result of aprox. 3GB duplicated files.

    These figures seem to match my storage use (23GB, some duplication and one small client backup)

     

    Just did a little test by trying to copying a directory containing 72,6 GB on files (size on disk) from Vista to the "public" share (non-duplicated). This attempt resulted in a "You need an additional 541MB to copy".

     

    So the ladingzone rule must still be there while the system drive's data partition is filling up....

    Theo.

    dimanche 29 juin 2008 21:41
    Modérateur
  • Theo
    This is a good test.  You might want to add these observations to the connect ticket!
    Flad
    dimanche 29 juin 2008 21:54
  •  fladtheimpaler wrote:
    OK check this out.
    So basically with PP1 it looks like it tries to fill every disk and then move onto the next one?   I bet it waits until this Disk 3 is 95% full or greater before it touches Disk 4.     

     

    Interesting! I bet there is more to this: I just withnessed WHS starting to copy to the second disk when copying part of the files from my earlyer post. Free space on Disk#0 (sys) does not change (!), free space on Disk#1 is slowly decreasing. Is Demigrator active? Nope. It is sitting there completely idle...

     

    I would say that the system is directly copying to the second disk without using system disk?!

    Dynamic landing zone? Or maybe am I just getting to tired to figure this....

    Hope Jessep will be able to shed some light on this soon...

    Theo.

     

    dimanche 29 juin 2008 22:03
    Modérateur
  •  fladtheimpaler wrote:
    Theo
    This is a good test.  You might want to add these observations to the connect ticket!
    Flad

     

    Will do so tomorrow! Need some sleep as I am at GMT+1 :-)

    Please keep me posted ;-)

    dimanche 29 juin 2008 22:07
    Modérateur
  •  fladtheimpaler wrote:
    OK check this out.

    This is the layout that disk management add in reports.  (No Disk 2 is reported i didnt miss it)

    Disk 0 System 87% used
    Disk 1 98% used
    Disk 3 81% used
    Disk 4 0% used (Newly added drive)
    Disk 5 95% used
    Disk 6 98% used
    Disk 7 95% used

    It appears since some backups were purged off the system Disk 3 had some space cleared up as last night it was at 9x% used.   

    I started the file copy by queuing up 189gb in teracopy.    The data is copying and its filling Disk 3! meanwhile Disk 4 has 461GB free space!

    So basically with PP1 it looks like it tries to fill every disk and then move onto the next one?   I bet it waits until this Disk 3 is 95% full or greater before it touches Disk 4.     




    Disk 3 filled up to 93% and now it is starting to fill disk 4.    Disk 0 remains at 87% full.
    dimanche 29 juin 2008 22:23
  •  Theo van Elsberg wrote:

     

    Hi,

    I am getting a bad feeling on this....

    My VPC WHS reports a 143GB storage free from a total of 190GB. Hmmm.

    Disk#0 (system) has a data partition reporting a size of 97,17GB with 72,13GB free.

    Disk#1 (data) reports a size of 73,23 with 68,92GB free as a result of aprox. 3GB duplicated files.

    These figures seem to match my storage use (23GB, some duplication and one small client backup)

     

    Just did a little test by trying to copying a directory containing 72,6 GB on files (size on disk) from Vista to the "public" share (non-duplicated). This attempt resulted in a "You need an additional 541MB to copy".

     

    So the ladingzone rule must still be there while the system drive's data partition is filling up....

    Theo.

     

    That's exactly what I thought would happen with Vista as well.  Clearly there is something wrong with this build of PP1.  Hopefully this will get fixed before PP1 goes gold.  However, if the answer I got from the MS WHS team before is correct (this is "by design"), I think DE will be heading back to the drawing board again very soon....

    lundi 30 juin 2008 01:05
    Modérateur
  • It turns out that an algorithm that uses the most full disk that has enough free space for the file being copied is more likely to deliver good performance, and good disk utilization, than an algorithm that uses the least full disk. It also tends to keep files that are all copied as part of a single operation together.

    That's how Drive Extender works. Read "Balancing Storage" on page 17 of the Drive Extender technical brief. So, I think "by design" is an accurate statement.
    lundi 30 juin 2008 18:22
    Modérateur
  • Ken
    That is fine for the file copies.  To be honest I don't really care what drive it copies them to .   

    But the issue with data NOT migrating off the primary data partition does not seem by design.   

    It is severely cutting into the landing zone.    With Vista especially this will pose problems.

    This behavior is contradictory to everything we have been told about how WHS handles data on a file copy to date.

    Brian
    lundi 30 juin 2008 18:28
  • Okay, I've gotten to the bottom of this and Ken is right. The main issue is that the migration isn't intended to kick in until there is 10 gigs or less on the main drive and 20 gigs or less on any additional drives. I have updated the bug with additional comments elaborating on this as people didn't like how often it was balancing before during the pre-release v1 beta...

     

    Sorry for any hassle on this, hopefully this will help clarify the situation so even if it's not the most preferred way of handling the operation, the reason behind it can be understood a bit better.

    lundi 30 juin 2008 18:45
  • Ok let me see if I understand this.  

    Does Vista check the Primary Data partition to see how much free space is available on it before it does a copy or not?  

    My primary data partition is now down to only 91GB free.  

    Would this now limit me to copying at most 91GB of data to the WHS at one time from a Vista system?

    It seems to me there was an oversight somewhere in this design.   

    New file copies DO NOT add to the Primary Data partition, they are migrated to other drives as they are copied.  So when you are doing file copies if the storage drives have free space you are fine.

    The issue only comes about when all other drives are full and WHS is forced to store the data on the primary data partition. 

    Once it is stored there it seems you are now stuck with it there at the expense of your landing zone footprint?  

    I am sorry but either I am misunderstanding something or I question this design choice.   There should be a re write of the disk extender technical brief if this is the case.

    I think Kariya is going to have a field day with this




    lundi 30 juin 2008 19:09
  •  fladtheimpaler wrote:
    Ok let me see if I understand this.  
    Does Vista check the Primary Data partition to see how much free space is available on it before it does a copy or not?  

    I does...


     fladtheimpaler wrote:
    My primary data partition is now down to only 91GB free.  
    Would this now limit me to copying at most 91GB of data to the WHS at one time from a Vista system?


    That is the case with RTM. And as far as I can see this is still true for PP1

     

     fladtheimpaler wrote:

    The issue only comes about when all other drives are full and WHS is forced to store the data on the primary data partition. 

    Once it is stored there it seems you are now stuck with it there at the expense of your landing zone footprint?  

    I would say this is quite allright in case the primary drive is the only drive having free space left. But in the case (as kariya reported) there is free space on one of the other drives but data is not migrated off the system drive ...

     

    Think 'll start a little test to see if it is possible to force/create such a situation...

    Theo.

    lundi 30 juin 2008 19:24
    Modérateur
  • Theo

    This condition should not be too hard to reproduce.  More time consuming than anything.

    This is taken directly from the Drive Extender White paper:

    In a home server with three or more hard drives, Windows Home Server Drive Extender will attempt to move all of the files off the primary data partition onto the secondary hard drives to maximize the amount of free space on the primary data partition.

    This is a pretty big item to change functionality on without stating it in the PP1 release documentation.

    Flad
    lundi 30 juin 2008 19:46
  • I have now a system disk with a data partition of 97GB with 63GB free space.

    Added a second disk 99% free space, data is not migrated. Just as Kariya reported.

     

    According to Jessep (see conncect feedback ID 352410 from Kariya), "by Design"  migrating will only start when 10GB or less space is free on the system disk...

     

    So this effectively means the landing space will decrease as low as 10GB before data starts migrating to the secondsdisk? See if i can confirm this....

     

    lundi 30 juin 2008 19:50
    Modérateur
  • I WILL NEVER GET TO 10GB FREE ON THE SYSTEM DISK unless all other drives are filled!

    New file copies DO NOT go to the system disk on a permanent basis if there is free disk space on a different disk!

    The data is immediately copied to one of the data disks with empty space.
    lundi 30 juin 2008 19:55
  • In my case (by adding an addition drive) it could mean that I am stuck with a limitted landing zone for a long time unless I manually copy off files and then re-copy them back to WHS?

     

    Something tells me there will be a new bug-report real soon now?
    I'm preparing to see if I can reproduce...

    lundi 30 juin 2008 20:03
    Modérateur
  •  Theo van Elsberg wrote:

    In my case (by adding an addition drive) it could mean that I am stuck with a limitted landing zone for a long time unless I manually copy off files and then re-copy them back to WHS?

     

    Something tells me there will be a new bug-report real soon now?
    I'm preparing to see if I can reproduce...



    The logic seems somewhat flawed in all of this.  

    It sounds like I will need to do the following:

    1. Remove my new empty disk from the pool.   
    2. Wait until the Primary Data Drive is jam packed with files and at that time re add the empty drive
    3  Hope since the drive is below the 10gb threshold it will then migrate the data to the new disk once it has been re added?

    And to add why haven't any of my data drives which now have less than 20GB free migrated some data to the drive sitting idle with 465gb free?      
    lundi 30 juin 2008 20:14
  •  fladtheimpaler wrote:
    And to add why haven't any of my data drives which now have less than 20GB free migrated some data to the drive sitting idle with 465gb free?      

    I guess extender will fill up one drive at the time. Also by design and I can follow the logic on this. So I would expect data to be migrated to this drive first until it has filled up. Then it will start moving data to the disk newly added?

     

    lundi 30 juin 2008 20:25
    Modérateur
  • My point is Jessep posted the following about the design:

    "The main issue is that the migration isn't intended to kick in until there is 10 gigs or less on the main drive and 20 gigs or less on any additional drives"

    I have drives that have less than 20gb space free.

    By the above logic why hasn't any of the data on these drives been migrated over to the drive that is empty at 461GB free?

    lundi 30 juin 2008 20:31
  •  fladtheimpaler wrote:
    Does Vista check the Primary Data partition to see how much free space is available on it before it does a copy or not?  
    Yes. 
     fladtheimpaler wrote:
    Would this now limit me to copying at most 91GB of data to the WHS at one time from a Vista system?
    Yes.
     fladtheimpaler wrote:
    It seems to me there was an oversight somewhere in this design.
    Not in my opinion. Microsoft made a series of choices as to how and when files would be moved by Drive Extender. This is a logical result of the decision not to mess with a static file. And that decision is a good one, otherwise everytime you changed any file on your server Drive Extender might be thrashing your drives extensively trying to relocate everything.

    Edit: It's not my intent to defend Microsoft in this particular instance, BTW. I know and understand the reasons for the decision that led to this situation, but I agree that more work should have been done to resolve the system drive space issue. Other drives can go hang, for all I care. Smile
    mardi 1 juillet 2008 00:28
    Modérateur
  • Thanks for the input Ken.

    I am also not concerned where the files are on the data disks, part of using WHS is yielding control over that and I am fine with this part of the equation,  I just feel like if there is empty disk space on the data drives the data should be migrated off the primary data partition as per the original design of WHS.

    Additionally I am not seeing the behavior I am told should be happening when the less than 20GB free space threshold is hit.  

    There is no migration happening on these data drives which are packed to the gills all with less than 20GB free space.

    I am interested to see how my connect issue is addressed.  
    mardi 1 juillet 2008 01:21
  • Flad, you should be aware that probably nothing will happen if you load your server up so that every drive is at it's limit (which is only approximately 20 GB; there's room for fudging in that number I'm sure), then add a drive and walk away for a month. Smile Windows Home Server does not, as a rule, mess around with files that aren't changing.
    mardi 1 juillet 2008 16:12
    Modérateur
  • Ok.   This makes sense because the vast majority of my data is static (music, movies, etc).       Since I am not using Vista the impact to me is minimal, but people who are using Vista may be put in a bad position by the latest change to the migrator in regards to the primary data partiton.    

    The problem is follows:

    If Data Drives are filled during copy then data is then pushed to Primary Data Drive.  (In the process landing zone is being reduced).

    Now the landing zone has been permanently reduced and there is seemingly no recovery from that.   We are being  told that around 10GB free space on the Primary Data Partition should force a migration, but in real world usage I do not see this ever happening.   

    Once you add a new drive to the pool any new file copies will be directed to the new drive AND you will now be limited to copies equalling the size of your reduced landing zone.     The only way I can see to get around this would be to first jam pack the landing zone so it is full with less than 10GB free space and then add a new drive.  

    Are you kidding me?   This is something the average WHS user is going to understand?

    BAH!!! 


    mardi 1 juillet 2008 17:13
  •  fladtheimpaler wrote:
    The problem is follows:

    If Data Drives are filled during copy then data is then pushed to Primary Data Drive.  (In the process landing zone is being reduced). [...

     

    Impaler,

    Fullt agree on this.

     

    1) On a one disk system, storage space get low, so logically one would add an additional disk.

     

    I have just recreated this situation. The WHS test system had:

    • A system disk (100G, 15% free storage ->  15GB free for landing zone)

      Time to add a second disk...!
    • A 2nd data disk, 80GB, 99% free -> unused!

    I can enable duplication. Dupliacted files are then stored on the second disk. But as soon I remove duplication from the share the system removes the duplicate files from the second disk. I copy new data to the server, it is moved to the second disk. No way the first disk ever reaches a situation where data is migrated off.

     

    1) The second disk fails.

    •  I remove the second disk. This would fill the system disk.
    • Add a replacement for the second disk.

    If Murphy has anything to say on this it is quite likely that the first disk still had more then 10GB free space left after removing the failing 2nd disk.

     

    I can only concluded that in both cases I would result in a 'cripled' landing zone. I am now trying to imagine how to fill up my newly added 1 TByte disk (in batches of 15GByte?).

     

    I will play some with the current test system to see how it behaves...

     

    At least I would suggest a change to PP1 to trigger data migration for the system disk when adding a new disk. I think this could partly solve the problem?.

     


     

    mardi 1 juillet 2008 21:33
    Modérateur
  • First to Jessep:  Thanks for getting the info and passing it along (no matter how terrible an idea I think the change is).

     

    For Windows XP (and older OS) users, it's not exactly the end of the world (since it doesn't check for available free space anyway and the files go straight to the secondary drive).

     

    However, what about the people who are using Microsoft's big, new, fancy OS, Windows Vista, the one Microsoft is trying to actively promote (while also trying to quietly slide XP "under the rug" as of midnight last night)?

     

    Scenario:  A Vista user sets up WHS on a single, large capacity drive (or they purchased the MS approved and advertised HP EX470).  They use it for a while, copy some DVD isos to it.  One day they check the Server Storage tab and see there is about 20 GB free.  What do they do?  Buy a new hard drive and add it, of course!  It's so easy to use and maintain, might as well, right?  They go out, drop $200 on a 1 TB and add it to the server.  "Great!  Now I got tons more space to use!  I'm just going to copy 5 more DVD isos to the server and... what?  What's this message 'You need an additional 832 MB to copy'.  How can that be?  I just added 1 TB to the server!!!  What is going on!?!?!?"  And the worst part is:  there is no WHS "user-friendly" way out of it!!!

     

    I can sit here and quote the DE Technical Brief all day, but I'm not going to (since others already have).  Instead, I'll quote the Power Pack 1 Public Beta Release Documentation (bold text marked by me):

     

    ·         Balancing Storage includes migration of files to secondary data volumes. Prior to Power Pack 1, this happened whenever there was file activity in the Windows Home Server shared folders directory. In this update both migration as well as rebalancing files across volumes for better space utilization is initiated under the following conditions:

    1.       Every hour.

    2.       When the Drive Extender Migrator service starts up – typically when you first turn on your home server.

    3.       When a shared folder is added or removed using the Windows Home Server Console’s Shared Folders tab.

    4.       When duplication on a shared folder is turned on or off.

    5.       When a hard drive is added to Server Storage using the Windows Home Server Console.

     

    How exactly does the new DE help you with the migration of files to secondary data volumes for better space utilization?  I sure don't see it.  What exactly does it do "every hour"?  If the files are truly static, there is no reason for DE to do anything in relation to balancing (since the files are already in their "final location" upon arrival).

     

    Here are some alternate ways this should have been done (listed best to worst IMO, and all of which, IMO, are better than what's in Power Pack 1):

     

    1.  Perform a one-time migration of data left on the primary drive in this situation to a just-added secondary drive to free up space for the landing zone (perhaps even lock down the network shares temporarily while this runs, if necessary)

    2.  Present a warning from the system tray icon saying "The temporary storage area for WHS is running low on space, would you like to clean it up now?"

    3.  Allow users the ability to choose from different levels of DE "aggressiveness" in the Console (with detailed pros and cons listed for each)

    4.  Present an option in the Console to "force" a migration of data on the primary drive to free up landing zone space (with a clear, simple explanation for novice users that makes sense)

    5.  Change the threshold to a percentage of the drive (instead of a set GB amount)

    6.  Raise the primary drive threshold to something more realistic (for example, 50 GB)

    7.  Allow Folder Duplication to "migrate" the data by turning it on, then turning it off again (right now in PP1, if you enable Folder Duplication, then disable it again, it gets rid of the alternate shadow it just created on the secondary drive, not the primary shadow on the primary drive)

     

    (Granted, that last one is a terrible idea and not-at-all user friendly, but, IMO, it's no worse than DE the way it is in PP1.)

     

    Was DE a little "over-anxious" with regards to migration before PP1?  Perhaps.  (Although, IMO, no.  I never experienced the "constant grinding" of hard drives other people have posted here.)  However, this change doesn't make DE "lazier".  It puts DE in a coma.

     

    Don't get me wrong.  I love the concept of WHS.  IMO, the thinking behind the product is nothing short of ingenious.  It just seems to me that they didn't take much time to come up with a real solution to what is a big problem (and is sure to get bigger as time goes on...)

     

     fladtheimpaler wrote:
    I think Kariya is going to have a field day with this

     

    Who, me? Wink

    mercredi 2 juillet 2008 03:13
    Modérateur
  • I am glad that Theo and Kariya are seeing what I am seeing and are in agreement this is not a good implementation.

    My connect issue has not been touched by MS since it was opened and sits in an Active status.  

    It sure would be nice to get some input.
    mercredi 2 juillet 2008 16:34
  • FYI: Added additional feedback 354746

     

    I think it is now to the WHS Team to decided how to deal with this one.

    Still love PP1!

    Theo.

    mercredi 2 juillet 2008 20:10
    Modérateur
  •  Theo van Elsberg wrote:
    FYI: Added additional feedback 354746

     

    I think it is now to the WHS Team to decided how to deal with this one.

    Still love PP1!

    Theo.

     

    Make sure you vote on it everyone!

    mercredi 2 juillet 2008 21:13
    Modérateur
  •  fladtheimpaler wrote:
    I am glad that Theo and Kariya are seeing what I am seeing and are in agreement this is not a good implementation.

    My connect issue has not been touched by MS since it was opened and sits in an Active status.  

    It sure would be nice to get some input.

     

    We are still looking into the reports and unortunately that can take a little bit of time Flad. Please bear with us as we are definitely not ignoring your issue...

     

    Sorry for any confusion but I will be updating your bug as soon as possible with as much information as I can.

    jeudi 3 juillet 2008 01:56
  •  Jessep Bangham [MS] wrote:

     fladtheimpaler wrote:
    I am glad that Theo and Kariya are seeing what I am seeing and are in agreement this is not a good implementation.

    My connect issue has not been touched by MS since it was opened and sits in an Active status.  

    It sure would be nice to get some input.

     

    We are still looking into the reports and unortunately that can take a little bit of time Flad. Please bear with us as we are definitely not ignoring your issue...

     

    Sorry for any confusion but I will be updating your bug as soon as possible with as much information as I can.



    Jessep
    I completely understand!   Thanks for the update.
    Flad
    jeudi 3 juillet 2008 02:14
  • As a long time user of WHS, I put PP1 on my server.  I do believe I have a good understanding of how WHS works, or how it used to work.  I like the idea that the files seem to go directly to the secondary drives.  This seems to make sense as it will lessen the load..  But I actually ran into this issue! 

    I had six hard drives and was down to under 100 gig of space.  So I purchased a 750 gig hard drive to add.  Everything went great and I watched to see if my landing zone would increase as it was being copied to the new drive.  Never happened..  So I stopped thinking about it because everything is now running super fast and copying to the server is 20+ meg a second compared to the measly 3 meg before. 

    After reading this thread, it all makes sense now.  But how do I get my landing pad emptied so I can have more then such and such max copy room.  All my systems are Vista!  I have not had an instance where I have hit the limit, it's about 90gig or so..  But being that I really have 700 gig free space I want to be able to copy 700 gig of files if needed, at the same time.  I have had to copy almost 100 gig once.  I will be watching this thread to see what the solution is. 

    I like the idea of a one time migration when you first put in the new drive.  Have it empty the landing zone and then start filling up the new drive.  No longer will it be necessary to make sure your primary drive is the fastest...
    jeudi 3 juillet 2008 11:16
  •  Enchanter wrote:
    As a long time user of WHS, I put PP1 on my server.  I do believe I have a good understanding of how WHS works, or how it used to work.  I like the idea that the files seem to go directly to the secondary drives.  This seems to make sense as it will lessen the load..  But I actually ran into this issue! 

    I had six hard drives and was down to under 100 gig of space.  So I purchased a 750 gig hard drive to add.  Everything went great and I watched to see if my landing zone would increase as it was being copied to the new drive.  Never happened..  So I stopped thinking about it because everything is now running super fast and copying to the server is 20+ meg a second compared to the measly 3 meg before. 

    After reading this thread, it all makes sense now.  But how do I get my landing pad emptied so I can have more then such and such max copy room.  All my systems are Vista!  I have not had an instance where I have hit the limit, it's about 90gig or so..  But being that I really have 700 gig free space I want to be able to copy 700 gig of files if needed, at the same time.  I have had to copy almost 100 gig once.  I will be watching this thread to see what the solution is. 

    I like the idea of a one time migration when you first put in the new drive.  Have it empty the landing zone and then start filling up the new drive.  No longer will it be necessary to make sure your primary drive is the fastest...



    Please validate the current connect bug for this: 354152
    jeudi 3 juillet 2008 12:50
  •  Enchanter wrote:
    As a long time user of WHS, I put PP1 on my server.  I do believe I have a good understanding of how WHS works, or how it used to work.  I like the idea that the files seem to go directly to the secondary drives.  This seems to make sense as it will lessen the load..  But I actually ran into this issue! 

    I had six hard drives and was down to under 100 gig of space.  So I purchased a 750 gig hard drive to add.  Everything went great and I watched to see if my landing zone would increase as it was being copied to the new drive.  Never happened..  So I stopped thinking about it because everything is now running super fast and copying to the server is 20+ meg a second compared to the measly 3 meg before. 

    After reading this thread, it all makes sense now.  But how do I get my landing pad emptied so I can have more then such and such max copy room.  All my systems are Vista!  I have not had an instance where I have hit the limit, it's about 90gig or so..  But being that I really have 700 gig free space I want to be able to copy 700 gig of files if needed, at the same time.  I have had to copy almost 100 gig once.  I will be watching this thread to see what the solution is. 

    I like the idea of a one time migration when you first put in the new drive.  Have it empty the landing zone and then start filling up the new drive.  No longer will it be necessary to make sure your primary drive is the fastest...

     

    Here are the only options currently available:

     

    A)  Fill up your WHS to almost capacity (forcing the "landing zone" down to less than 10 GB), then add a new drive.

    B)  Add a new drive.  Then find out which actual files are stored on the primary drive (by logging into the server desktop and looking to see what's in D:\DE\shares), pull those files off of the server through the network shares (NOT through the D:\DE\shares window you use to locate them), then put them back to WHS (again, through the network shares).

     

    jeudi 3 juillet 2008 22:23
    Modérateur
  • based on your question and a few others I posted a blog entry at http://blogs.msdn.com/chrisgray/,  I hope it helps answer your questions?

     

    ----------------------

    I've been asked by a few folks to describe the Power Pack 1 algorithms for "auto-migration", duplication, and balancing. In short the algorithms are the same with a few minor adjustments made based on customer feedback from our first release and the various Power Pack betas.

    For reference there is a document located here with more info on the pre-Power Pack 1

    http://download.microsoft.com/download/2/F/C/2FC09C20-587F-4F16-AA33-C6C4C75FB3DD/Windows_Home_Server_Drive_Extender.pdf

    The decision of which volume a file will be located is based on one of three questions

    1. Did the file get created for the first time (auto-migration)
    2. Did the user ask for the file to be duplicated (duplication)
    3. Does enough free space one volume allow another volume to offload some files (balancing)

    Often caused by:

    • one of the servers volumes filling up
    • bunch of files get deleted
    • new hard disk added or removed

    Auto-migration:

    When a file is first created it's said to be "auto-migrated"  this basically means a volume with sufficient free space was chosen to hold the file. The decision of which volume is designed to keep related files on the same volume in case of disk failure in case the folder was not chosen by the user for duplication. If you imagine a situation where your music isn't duplicated and you have a physical disk failure. You'd probably prefer to have one or two CD's go missing to having one or two songs from several albums go missing.

    This is the algorithm Drive Extender uses to decide which volume to place your files

    i.Use the volume with the least amount of free space but greater than 10GB

    ii.Use the volume with the most amount of free space so long as it has more space than the Primary Volume (D volume)

    iii.Use the Primary Volume (D volume)

     

    If you play this out in your head with imaginary file copies I think you'll see how it ends up clustering files together. You'll end up filling up the volume with the least free space first and then moving to the most used filling it up next.

    If we would have used a simple "most free" algorithm we'd get into a situation where once all volumes had the same amount of free space we'd interleave every other song/picture across several volumes.

    Duplication:

    Auto-migration doesn't duplicate your files or balance your files, it just chooses where the file first goes. Duplication occurs (in PP1) every hour with the goal of making sure your chosen files have multiple copies. The algorithm is to inspect every file looking for change since last duplication.  If the file has changed or if the file has not yet been duplicated we create a duplicate copy using the below algorithm.

    Duplication preferences for destination volumes

    i.Most empty non-primary volume

    ii.Primary volume

     

    The algorithm here is a little different from auto-migration because it will end up interleaving between volumes. We did this because the problem of locality isn't as important since we're in the process of duplicating.

    Balancing:

    Balancing solve the problem of how to handle disk space imbalances. Just like duplication, balancing occurs every hour in PP1. The need to balance occurs typically with addition of a new volume or when the user deletes a bunch of files. The goal of balancing is to move files off any volume that contains less than 10GB of free space. If this condition happens we say the volume has reached a "danger" level because it's possible to have a situation where files cannot be extended (imagine your outlook .pst file getting bigger and bigger over time).

    The PP1 balancing algorithm starts only when a volume contains less than 10GB of free space. When this occurs the goal is to start moving files to volumes with more space until 20GB is reached. Think of this as mowing your yard. You wait until your significant other tells you the yard is out of hand and you cut back the yard enough so it looks good and so that you don't have to do it again for a while - it's the same idea, in balancing we start moving files when the volume has less than 10GB free and we stop at 20GB so we don't have to come back for a while.

    The algorithm for finding free space is the same as in migration with the only difference being we won't push another volume into an unhappy state in order to achieve self happiness. A quick example would be if during balancing a volume with 5 GB of free space we wont push another volume of its comfort range by making it go under 10GB.

    Defining these numbers is tough as there are tradeoffs in all directions. If you've got huge hard disks with lots and lots of free space and gigantic files you may prefer bigger numbers (maybe 30GB and 60GB) but if you've got just two drives you may prefer smaller numbers. We used our extensive beta program to measure 10GB and 20GB as good numbers. However if you understand the description above you can reconfigure the 10GB and 20GB lines with the registry keys

    HKLM\Software\Microsoft\DriveExtender (both are DWORDS)

    "SecondaryFreeSpaceDangerLevel" (defaults to 10)

    "SecondaryFreeSpaceWarningLevel" (defaults to 20)

    both values are measured in GB

     

    vendredi 4 juillet 2008 18:23
  • Chris,

    This is a great post.  Very informative.    Everything posted here makes perfect sense from an implemenatation perspective.
     
    I think the only issue I feel we are concerned with, is in respect to the Primary Data Partition.  

    It is being treated equal to other disks in the system which long term will cause major problems for many users.   

    When other drives have ample space, the Primary Data Partition should not be used for permanent storage of static files. 

    Thanks Again.

    Flad
    vendredi 4 juillet 2008 19:32
  • Chris,

     

    Thanks for the info.  However, as flad already stated, the problem is treating the "landing zone" partition as a regular drive (which it's not since all files have to go through it one way or another).

     

    However, in a question related to your post, if I understand correctly, those registry keys can be added (NOTE: by default, they do not exist) to manipulate how much free space will be held on each drive?  For example, right now, WHS keeps 20 GB free space per drive for file expansion.  If, in my opinion, that is too high, I could add those registry keys to lower that amount?  For example, set danger to 5 and warning to 10, which should then only keep 10 GB free space per drive, instead of 20?  Also, what do the PrimaryFreeSpaceBuffer and SecondaryFreeSpaceBuffer do?

    vendredi 4 juillet 2008 20:32
    Modérateur
  •  Chris Gray (WHS Team @ MSFT) wrote:

    Auto-migration:

    [....]

    This is the algorithm Drive Extender uses to decide which volume to place your files

    i.Use the volume with the least amount of free space but greater than 10GB

    ii.Use the volume with the most amount of free space so long as it has more space than the Primary Volume (D volume)

    iii.Use the Primary Volume (D volume)

    [...]

    Duplication:

    [...]

    Duplication preferences for destination volumes

    i.Most empty non-primary volume

    ii.Primary volume

    [..]

    Balancing:

    [...]

    The PP1 balancing algorithm starts only when a volume contains less than 10GB of free space. When this occurs the goal is to start moving files to volumes with more space until 20GB is reached [....] in balancing we start moving files when the volume has less than 10GB free and we stop at 20GB so we don't have to come back for a while.

    The algorithm for finding free space is the same as in migration with the only difference being we won't push another volume into an unhappy state in order to achieve self happiness.

    [...]

    Thanks a lot Chris for this explanation!!!

     

    At first reading, it all makes sense. But then again....

    I am missing something very important and I do hope the original designspecs for PP1 have them in: the 'landingzone' concept!?

     

    Could well be that I missed something, but studying your explanation of the algorithms used for auto-migration and duplication my conclusion is that it is very likely that eventually the primairy data volume will end up with 10 to 20GB free space left (auto-migration rule i.?). The balancing algorithme will not fix this.

     

    So that would not only be consistent with our findings but even worse...
    Please tell me that I am in error?

     

     

    Theo.

    PS - Concerning the auto-migration algorithm: please check again. Is this corrent?
    My build 1771 test-system had 15GB of free space left on the primairy volume. But *all* files seemed to be consistently auto-migrated to the secondairy volume. So either the implemtation of algorithme has a problem or it is implemented  sligthly different?

     

    vendredi 4 juillet 2008 20:57
    Modérateur
  •  Theo van Elsberg wrote:
    Thanks a lot Chris for this explanation!!!

    At first reading, it all makes sense. But then again....

    I am missing something very important and I do hope the original designspecs for PP1 have them in: the 'landingzone' concept!?

    Could well be that I missed something, but studying your explanation of the algorithms used for auto-migration and duplication my conclusion is that it is very likely that eventually the primairy data volume will end up with 10 to 20GB free space left (auto-migration rule i.?). The balancing algorithme will not fix this.

    Actually, I believe rule i doesn't apply to the primary drive (otherwise he would not have mentioned the D volume in iii.)

     Theo van Elsberg wrote:
    So that would not only be consistent with our findings but even worse...
    Please tell me that I am in error?

     

    Theo.

    PS - Concerning the auto-migration algorithm: please check again. Is this corrent?
    My build 1771 test-system had 15GB of free space left on the primairy volume. But *all* files seemed to be consistently auto-migrated to the secondairy volume. So either the implemtation of algorithme has a problem or it is implemented  sligthly different?

     

    No, based on what Chris said, it's working as designed.  (In order to get your data to migrate from the primary volume, that volume needs to get below 10 GB free, and even then it will only get back up to 20 GB free.)

     

    However, if you were to create those registry keys he mentioned, you might be able to get it to move now.  (Just remember, if I understand it correctly, those keys would apply to all drives, not just the primary drive.)

     

    P.S.  I hope you have your data backed up, just in case. Wink

    vendredi 4 juillet 2008 21:17
    Modérateur
  • kariya,

    Your assumtion that rule i. doesn't apply to the primary drive makes sense. It is consistend with the behaviour as mentioned in my PS, so I think you are rigth on that.

     

    But then again as you say: the balancing algorithme will never clear the primairy volume...

    vendredi 4 juillet 2008 21:40
    Modérateur
  •  

    Chris,

    Thank you for your explanation.

    I think that in realisitic terms the system drive should be the last drive that data is stored on and should only be used when ALL the other drives are full.

    When a new drive is added to the pool, any files stored on the system drive should be auto-migrated to the new drive immediately.

    The way it works presently is like a time bomb waiting to explode in your face.  Most of us here may know how to implement your registry trick, but lets be real here....  there are a lot of ordinary mums and dads that have no idea what you are talking about...  and why should they ??

     

    Anyway, i hope you guys re-think your stratgegies and give us back our landing zone..   i  for one frequently transfer much more that 20Gigs of data let alone 10Gigs...

     

    Like i said, most of us here are able to use your registry work around, but let's think about the average Joe Blo for a minute...  They have the right to use WHS just as much as everyone else....  without the hassles.

     

    my 2 cents worth..

    vendredi 4 juillet 2008 22:33
  • After reading thru this thread, it'd explain my original issue -  

    http://forums.microsoft.com/windowshomeserver/showpost.aspx?pageindex=1&siteid=50&postid=3487642&sb=0&d=1&at=7&ft=11&tf=0&pageid=0

     

    My only concern is if I hit the 20 GB mark. Sometimes I have friends that come over with a dead system and wants random stuff from it before formatting... I tend to just toss those on the WHS and then back. With some of the larger game files, saves and their... "stuff that I do not ask of", they can go over 20 GB easily. Sad

    dimanche 6 juillet 2008 05:59
  •  DatAsian wrote:

    After reading thru this thread, it'd explain my original issue -  

    http://forums.microsoft.com/windowshomeserver/showpost.aspx?pageindex=1&siteid=50&postid=3487642&sb=0&d=1&at=7&ft=11&tf=0&pageid=0

     

    My only concern is if I hit the 20 GB mark. Sometimes I have friends that come over with a dead system and wants random stuff from it before formatting... I tend to just toss those on the WHS and then back. With some of the larger game files, saves and their... "stuff that I do not ask of", they can go over 20 GB easily.

     

    The only time you would have a problem is if A) you're using Vista and B) you are trying to add more GB of data than the amount of free space on the D partition on WHS.  Anything else other than that and you should be ok (because the files actually go straight through the D partition to a secondary drive).

    dimanche 6 juillet 2008 06:21
    Modérateur
  •  DatAsian wrote:
    My only concern is if I hit the 20 GB mark. Sometimes I have friends that come over with a dead system and wants random stuff from it before formatting... I tend to just toss those on the WHS and then back. With some of the larger game files, saves and their... "stuff that I do not ask of", they can go over 20 GB easily.
    So you make a folder/share, copy the stuff over, reformat, copy the stuff back, delete it, and you're done. Probably with no net change on your server. And in any case, you're probably not copying more than 20 GB in a single shot. You have a list of standard folders, I'm sure, but then there will be a bunch of custom stuff  (including his Internet pr0n collection, I assume, given "stuff that I do not ask of") that the friend of the moment wants preserved in addition. So you'll take two or three passes to get everything.
    dimanche 6 juillet 2008 12:50
    Modérateur
  •  

    So taking all 5 pages of this post into account.  Would it be better for diversification to have the OS on a smaller drive, and have large secondary drives, or have the OS on a huge drive, and have a mix of large and small secondaries?

     

    Which would allow Vista machines do the most file transfer for years to come not just the first week?

     

    I would like to hear your opinions so I can decide how to layout my new server Smile

     

     

    Brad

     

    lundi 7 juillet 2008 01:55
  •  BradPr US wrote:
    So taking all 5 pages of this post into account.  Would it be better for diversification to have the OS on a smaller drive, and have large secondary drives, or have the OS on a huge drive, and have a mix of large and small secondaries?

     

    I would still install WHS on a high-capacity drive (300+ GB).  If you install on a small drive, even if a fix were to come out (which I believe will happen at some point), it wouldn't help you any.  (Your only option that way would be to perform a Server Reinstallation.)

     

     BradPr US wrote:
    Which would allow Vista machines do the most file transfer for years to come not just the first week?

     

    To clarify:  if you start with more than 1 drive, you won't have this issue (at least not at the beginning).  The only time you will experience this issue is when all of the secondary (data) drives are full so WHS has no place left to store files except on the primary drive.  Then you add a drive afterwards.  Only then will the data be "stuck" on the primary drive (thereby reducing your "landing zone").

     

     BradPr US wrote:
    I would like to hear your opinions so I can decide how to layout my new server

     

     

    Brad

    lundi 7 juillet 2008 02:24
    Modérateur
  • Microsoft has closed my connect issue.  Put this thread to bed.

    The answer I am being provided does nothing to address the crippling of the landing zone!!!!!



    Hello again Flad but unfortunately after much discussion and verification,
    this resolution is the same as your previous issues as being by design.
    The method that Windows Home Server uses to balance it's storage is not
    that it balances out your data across any and all drives, but that it
    focuses on filling up the available pool of one drive before migrating
    data across to other drives. As soon as your primary drive hit's it's
    10 gig or less point, it will begin to migrate it's data over to the
    new drive (providing there isn't enough room to contain the new data on
    the other drives already installed in your Home Server.) as will your
    other drives when they hit their 20 gigs (or less) available point.

    I'm sorry if this is not your preferred method of handling this data but
    your thoughts and feedback (as well as that of other users in the
    forums) on this will be taken into account for future releases.





    lundi 7 juillet 2008 20:15
  • Reading this thread, and noting I don't have the problem because I started out with a multi-drive system, Microsoft are saying:

     

    1: If you've a single drive system and fill up your primary drive, then add a second drive, you're up the creek without a paddle, as it'll only ever free up a max of 20GB on the "landing zone".

     

    2: If you've got a multi-drive system with your "landing zone" partially full, you're also up the creek without a paddle as the system will never move data off the landing zone until the primary drive reaches 10GB free space, and then will only empty it to 20GB free.

     

    3: The ideal situation is to install WHS, PP1 on at least a 2 drive system, and start adding more storage before the extra drives become full to ensure that data never ends up staying on the landing zone. This is the way my WHS seems to be working (I've a system with 6 drives, and no "real" data on the primary drive).

     

    mardi 8 juillet 2008 07:22
  • Does this mean that at the end of the day is makes no difference if your system drive is 80gb or 1Tb as the landing zone may fill to 20gb free anyway?
    mardi 8 juillet 2008 10:55
  •  Richard Holland wrote:

    Reading this thread, and noting I don't have the problem because I started out with a multi-drive system, Microsoft are saying:

     

    1: If you've a single drive system and fill up your primary drive, then add a second drive, you're up the creek without a paddle, as it'll only ever free up a max of 20GB on the "landing zone".

     

    2: If you've got a multi-drive system with your "landing zone" partially full, you're also up the creek without a paddle as the system will never move data off the landing zone until the primary drive reaches 10GB free space, and then will only empty it to 20GB free.

     

    3: The ideal situation is to install WHS, PP1 on at least a 2 drive system, and start adding more storage before the extra drives become full to ensure that data never ends up staying on the landing zone. This is the way my WHS seems to be working (I've a system with 6 drives, and no "real" data on the primary drive).

     



    WHS is billed as an ease of use product for the masses, yet "mom and pop" will need to obtain a PHD on the Drive Extender Technical Brief to use it.     I find WHS V1 great, but I wouldn't let my folks or non technie friends touch this with a 10 foot pole.

    You can easily get into a situation where you have 1TB of free space on the WHS and NOT be able to copy 30GB of data in one shot.    That makes a lot of sense.  
    mardi 8 juillet 2008 15:38
  • The easy answer to problems with the system drive filling up is to always maintain a comfortable buffer on your server, about the size of your system drive. While that doesn't guarantee that nothing will be stored on the system drive, it does minimize the amount of stuff that will be there. You only run into problems when you fill your server pretty close to full.
    mardi 8 juillet 2008 19:21
    Modérateur
  • Hey everyone. First, thanks for everyone's participation in this thread, its been very interesting and informative. For the most part, I think I've followed the entire discussion, but I'm confused about one point, which I think is the most important part of this discussion. What is the system drive landing zone and why does it matter if its big or small?

    So ...

    1) Can someone here explain in detail how WHS uses the "landing zone".

    2) What are the implications of a small or large landing zone?

    3) I've seen some people point out vista vs XP and it seems that this issue may affect those operating systems differently. Explain that, and what about others like linux or Mac OS X that mounts the WHS shares using SMB?

    Thanks in advance.
    mardi 8 juillet 2008 20:20
  • The primary data partition on your home server is D:. It's where your shares are, and the tombstones that point to your files in other locations on your server. It's also the first point where files you copy to your server touch down. While the file may not actually be written on the D: partition, the tombstone created when the file is copied will at least temporarily take up the full space the file needs on D:.

    The size of the system disk is important because the free space on D:, your primary data partition (total size minus tombstones, file shadows stored on the system disk rather than secondary disks, and files stored outside the Windows Home Server-managed areas) is the amount of space you have available for copying files in a single operation. So if your system disk is 80 GB (shows as ~74 GB in the operating system) and you have 5 GB of miscellaneous stuff on your D: partition, your shares will report ~49 GB free to other client PCs on your network.

    The difference between Windows XP and Windows Vista is that XP doesn't consider the free space on the target when it starts copying files. So you could, in the scenario above, queue up 100 GB of files and XP would at least start the copy. If Drive Extender happened to migrate files off fast enough, your copy might even succeed. If not, it would die with an error at some point. Vista examines the space available and will refuse to start the copy if there isn't enough space free.
    mardi 8 juillet 2008 21:12
    Modérateur
  • If that is how Microsoft wants to handle DE, then can I request for a feature? Can we have a manual button on the Connector software or the Console that says something like "Make room on the primary drive"? It'll migrate all data on the primary D:\ drive to the other drive. Maybe an add-in that can do this would be nice too Stick out tongue
    mardi 8 juillet 2008 23:33
  • I assure you, Microsoft is aware of this issue. The WHS MVPs have been escalating it as an important issue to address, and the WHS team is actively discussing it in their team meetings. However, they will not hold the release of Power Pack 1 to address this issue. They will look at ways to address these concerns in the future, but no specific plans have been discussed with us.

    If you have specific thoughts about what shape a solution might take that would be most useful for you and other users, you should submit a product suggestion on Connect.
    mercredi 9 juillet 2008 04:05
    Modérateur
  • If you want to create a larger landing zone could you not define a larger SecondaryFreeSpaceWarningLevel (default 20) to say 40 and amend the SecondaryFreeSpaceDangerLevel (default 10) to a higher value to trigger the balancing?

     

    Described in Chris Gray's Blog on PP1 Drive Extender Balancing Algorithms used for Disk Balancing :

     

    http://blogs.msdn.com/chrisgray/archive/2008/07/04/a-brief-description-of-the-balancing-algorithms-used-in-power-pack-1-s-drive-extender.aspx

     

     

     

     

     

     

    mercredi 9 juillet 2008 08:41
  •  

    i'm curious....   does this issue only affect PP1 users ?

     

    I have a non PP1 system, and i have added a second hard drive to my pool.

    My single HDD was up to 98% full but has since dropped to 23% and the new drive is

     now 91% full...  All without my intervention..

     

    Anyone ??

    mercredi 9 juillet 2008 09:40
  • Yes, it's PP1 only

    mercredi 9 juillet 2008 09:43
    Modérateur
  •  brubber wrote:

    Yes, it's PP1 only

     

    Thats what i thought...  thanks for the heads up...

     

    It baffles me as to why MS have changed this...   seems to me like it was better left the way it was b4..

    mercredi 9 juillet 2008 09:44
  •  Daedelus wrote:
    If you want to create a larger landing zone could you not define a larger SecondaryFreeSpaceWarningLevel (default 20) to say 40 and amend the SecondaryFreeSpaceDangerLevel (default 10) to a higher value to trigger the balancing?

     

    Described in Chris Gray's Blog on PP1 Drive Extender Balancing Algorithms used for Disk Balancing :

     

    http://blogs.msdn.com/chrisgray/archive/2008/07/04/a-brief-description-of-the-balancing-algorithms-used-in-power-pack-1-s-drive-extender.aspx

     

    I briefly tried it in a VM the other day and I couldn't get it to work (although I didn't spend much time tinkering with it and trying various combinations either).

    mercredi 9 juillet 2008 13:30
    Modérateur
  •  kariya21 wrote:
    I briefly tried it in a VM the other day and I couldn't get it to work (although I didn't spend much time tinkering with it and trying various combinations either).

     

    I've just tried this on my system. I changed the 10/20 threshold to 20/30. Two drives had 13GB free, another 202GB and system 225GB.

     

    Rebooted & "Storage Balanced" was shown after a little while. Sadly the two drives still have only 13GB free. Maybe it will work in the final version. 

    mercredi 9 juillet 2008 15:57
  •  Ken Warren wrote:
    The easy answer to problems with the system drive filling up is to always maintain a comfortable buffer on your server, about the size of your system drive. While that doesn't guarantee that nothing will be stored on the system drive, it does minimize the amount of stuff that will be there. You only run into problems when you fill your server pretty close to full.

     

    WooHoo!!  PP1, jump from one frying pan into another frying pan. Fix the WHS data corruption, but now you can't copy data to WHS.

     

    My WHS currently has 2 750GB hard drives and I wasn't planning to add another (750GB or 1TB drive) until I got under 50GB of free space. I am currently hovering around 100GB of free space (although this changes by +/-50GB due to the VSS bug).

     

    So, Ken, what you are saying is that I need to maintain around 700GB of free space on my WHS to avoid this new PP1 DE problem? Kind of defeats the whole purpose of having WHS in the first place. When I built this WHS, I took the advice that the system drive should be as large as possible, which seems a bit counter to this new advice.

     

    Since most people will only add an additional hard disk to their WHS when free storage is almost gone (or more likely when they actually get an error that the disk is full when copying a file), it would seem that this will be a pretty common problem.

     

    Also, given the 10GB lower range, doesn't anyone (in the WHS beta) store any home videos on their WHS? Given that 1 hour of home video creates a file around 13GB (2 hour tapes create 25GB files), seems anyone storing home videos on WHS will encounter problems even quicker.

     

    In my case, I currently have about 35 DV AVI files (about 600GB) on my WHS (in addition to other media). Once PP1 goes "final" I was planning to add another hard drive (750GB or 1TB) and copy over another 600GB or so of home video files (each 13GB or 25GB in size). How do I go about doing this without running into problems?

    mercredi 9 juillet 2008 16:31
  •  Ken Warren wrote:
    I assure you, Microsoft is aware of this issue. The WHS MVPs have been escalating it as an important issue to address, and the WHS team is actively discussing it in their team meetings. However, they will not hold the release of Power Pack 1 to address this issue. They will look at ways to address these concerns in the future, but no specific plans have been discussed with us.

    If you have specific thoughts about what shape a solution might take that would be most useful for you and other users, you should submit a product suggestion on Connect.


    Guys I assure you I am not happy about this issue at all, but Ken's post puts me at ease.   As long as the Developers acknowledge this is an issue, and agree it needs to be addressed that is all we can ask.  

    Remember MS needs to get PP1 out the door as there is a critical data corruption fix that many non forum\connect users are still vulnerable to.

    PP1 is already at RC4.   Even a small code change at this stage of the game would trigger an entire series of regression tests, and from what I can tell addressing this problem would NOT be a small code change.   

    At this stage an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

    The best we can all do right now is be aware of how DE is working with PP1 and plan accordingly (IE add another disk BEFORE data is forced to fill the Primary Data Partition) OR if using Vista be ready to copy files in data chunks sized less than the ammount of free space on the primary data partition until a proper fix is provided.  
      
    We can *** all we want about this issue and make this thread 30 pages long, but in the end the problem will still be there.




    jeudi 10 juillet 2008 00:54
  •  fladtheimpaler wrote:


    Guys I assure you I am not happy about this issue at all, but Ken's post puts me at ease.   As long as the Developers acknowledge this is an issue, and agree it needs to be addressed that is all we can ask.  

    Remember MS needs to get PP1 out the door as there is a critical data corruption fix that many non forum\connect users are still vulnerable to.

    PP1 is already at RC4.   Even a small code change at this stage of the game would trigger an entire series of regression tests, and from what I can tell addressing this problem would NOT be a small code change.   

    At this stage an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

    The best we can all do right now is be aware of how DE is working with PP1 and plan accordingly (IE add another disk BEFORE data is forced to fill the Primary Data Partition) OR if using Vista be ready to copy files in data chunks sized less than the ammount of free space on the primary data partition until a proper fix is provided.  
      
    We can *** all we want about this issue and make this thread 30 pages long, but in the end the problem will still be there.




     

    flad-the-impaler (one of my favorite sigs of all time ...),

     

    Great Post !!!  The Windows Home Server team is well aware of this.  Multiple people from the team read the forums every day, sometimes we listen and let the community figure out what the team should do about certain issues.  As you said, we want to get Power Pack 1 "out the door"

     

    We listen to you guys, you all make the product better, you all make the product what you think it should become.  The Windows Home Server team is VERY customer focused.  We listen, we prioritize, we code, we test, we plan to make continuous improvements for a LONG time.

     

    best,

     

    Todd Headrick

    Product Planner

     

    p.s. keep all of the great feedback and passion coming ....!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    jeudi 10 juillet 2008 04:09
  •  fladtheimpaler wrote:
    Remember MS needs to get PP1 out the door as there is a critical data corruption fix that many non forum\connect users are still vulnerable to.

    Flad,

     

    I fully agree. We need to have PP1 released!

    • Data corruption problem.
      This is a very major issue that needs to be addressed and I am quite confident now that it is fixed in PP1.
    • Data migration is much-much-much better then it was in RTM.
    • Much wanted additional functionality and improvements...

    Concerning the 'landingzone' problem; I'm sure the Team will find a way to fix this aftter PP1 is released. For the time beeing - I may have found a workarround to "force off" data from the primairy drive. Need some additional testing to see if this is going to work. If it does it could easely fit into a little tooling that can be run affter adding a new drive. I'll keep you guys posted.

     

    Theo.

    jeudi 10 juillet 2008 12:17
    Modérateur
  • This is bad. VERY bad. VERY VERY VERY bad.

    I lost my system disk and had to do a clean install. I replaced the old 200Gb sysdisk with a 300Gb one...  adding 100Gb to the system disk sounded like a good idea.

    Side note - for whatever reason, server reinstall would not work - I had to do a clean install and recover the data from the storage pool drives (one by one).

    Now I'm stuck with a
    System disk showing 99% used (in Disk Management add-in) - 279Gb of 279Gb- and now cannot copy or move ANYTHING to the server. I'm also getting a Network Critical message "Not Enough Free Space on Some Hard Drives"...

    HOWEVER, my storage pool shows:

    Disk#  Capacity  Used  Status
    ---------- ------------- --------  ----------------------------
    Disk1   279Gb     99%  Healthy (System)
    Disk2   465Gb     0%    Healthy
    Disk3   465Gb     0%    Healthy
    Disk4   698Gb     44%  Healthy
    Disk5   698Gb     84%  Healthy

    Overall, server storage reports a total 2.55Tb, 898Gb used in shared folders, 280Gb used in System, 1.4Tb free.

    I've tried moving some files (100Gb) off to another disk off the server by copying them - then deleting - but the system disk (Disk1) remains at 99%, although Disk5 did frees up.


    Again, this is VERY BAD since I've spent the weekend rebuilding the server, now it's stuck with a full system disk and well over 1Tb of free space in the storage pool (two the 500Mb disks are completely free!).

    I "validated" and added this info to a bug report... but in the interim, I"m probably going to have to start over again with another clean install, unless there is a workaround to getting data off Disk1...
    dimanche 13 juillet 2008 21:01
  •  Theo van Elsberg wrote:
    For the time beeing - I may have found a workarround to "force off" data from the primairy drive. Need some additional testing to see if this is going to work. If it does it could easely fit into a little tooling that can be run affter adding a new drive. I'll keep you guys posted.


    Theo- please keep us posted - I'll also offer to help test any workarounds or concepts. At this stage,

    I'm pretty much at a dead stop in my situation - I either have to completely re-install again or pull the system disk out and "manually" delete / re-copy files (not sure how much havoc that will wreak).

    -MJ
    dimanche 13 juillet 2008 21:20
  • MJbos,

     

    Still here .

    Please hold on for just a few more days?

    Will have a solution for you that will work; but need some more time to validate.

    Theo.

     

    (PS - If you can not wait that long - feel free contact me by e-mail for more info)

    dimanche 13 juillet 2008 21:30
    Modérateur
  •  MJbos wrote:
    Theo- please keep us posted - I'll also offer to help test any workarounds or concepts. At this stage,

    I'm pretty much at a dead stop in my situation - I either have to completely re-install again or pull the system disk out and "manually" delete / re-copy files (not sure how much havoc that will wreak).

    -MJ

     

    There are 2 options:

     

    OPTION 1:  Uninstall PP1 beta.  When you do, it will revert to the way DE used to work (and will automatically clean off your landing zone).  Once it's migrated your data, you can re-install PP1 beta.  I would suggest this way (as the other way, if done incorrectly, can cause you even more problems).

     

    OPTION 2:  Force the data off yourself.  Just be warned: it's imperative that you follow these instructions carefully and exactly:

     

    1) Logon to the server desktop using RDC

    2) Open up My Computer and go to D:\DE\shares

    3) Look (and only look) to see what files are in this location. Do not move any files using this window!!!!

    4) Once you find a file or group of files in that location, go back to your local desktop and open the Shared Folders icon on the desktop

    5) Browse to those files you located and move them from the server, then put them back in the same location

     

    Again, it's absolutely essential that you do not move any data when you are viewing D:\DE\shares.  If you do, you will be worse off than you are now.

     

    If you have any questions, please ask before attempting this.

    dimanche 13 juillet 2008 22:59
    Modérateur
  • Theo- thanks for the encouragement. Looking forward to what you've come up with!!

    Kaiya2- your words of caution are heard loud & clear. I will probably take PP1 off then reapply... but before I do that, I think I may have stumbled upon something odd.

    When looking at the system disk (outside of WHS), I found the data partition ...

    D:\shares\
    ..Music
    ..Movies
    ..Videos
    ..Public
    ..Software
    ..etc


    but inside that /shares directory, I saw another directory /shares...

    D:\shares\shares

    ..Music
    <<not Movies>>
    ..Videos
    ..Public
    ..Software
    ..etc

    This second "shares" inside of "shares" contains files that add up to just about the entire size of the D: data partition, which prior to my bringing everything back to the WHS was the "free space".

    Is there some significance to the /shares/shares ... at this stage, I'm just looking and not modifying anything...

    Thanks all,
    MJ 

    lundi 14 juillet 2008 00:06
  • Seems that I did discover the problem afterall... and it was me.

    It was the /shares/shares directory... somehow I managed to accidentally copy files there while rebuilding.

    Now all seems well - 250+Gb of landing space and it's not shrinking as I put the last bits of the recovered files back.

    I will be putting in a backup system drive - I don't want to go through this fun again !

    -mj
    lundi 14 juillet 2008 04:49
  •  MJbos wrote:
    Seems that I did discover the problem afterall... and it was me.

    It was the /shares/shares directory... somehow I managed to accidentally copy files there while rebuilding.

     

    I was going to say that's definitely not normal.

     

     MJbos wrote:
    Now all seems well - 250+Gb of landing space and it's not shrinking as I put the last bits of the recovered files back.


    I will be putting in a backup system drive - I don't want to go through this fun again !

    -mj

     

    I don't see how a backup system drive would have helped you in this case.  The only time a backup drive (RAID 1, which is unsupported) will help is if one of the drives fail.

    lundi 14 juillet 2008 04:56
    Modérateur
  • Ive been checking these forums out for while just to see the status of PP1. Planning on buying a Mediasmart when PP1 is out the door.

    It looks like I have the same problem but this is just using Vista 64 not WHS.

    Once I fill up a drive, I try to delete or cut some content and its still shows the same amount of filled disk space.

    I dont expect an answer since this is for WHS only but I was just putting it out there for anyone else.

    lundi 14 juillet 2008 06:02
  •  kariya21 wrote:
    I don't see how a backup system drive would have helped you in this case.  The only time a backup drive (RAID 1, which is unsupported) will help is if one of the drives fail.

     

    That's exactly what I was thinking of doing - RAID1 the system disk. I know it's unsupported, but with how I have file duplication set-up, the system disk seems to be the "weakest link" in my set-up.

     

    Thanks to everyone who is posting their experiences - it really is a huge help to have so much collective experience & knowledge to peruse!

     

    -mj

    mardi 15 juillet 2008 03:49
  •  MJbos wrote:
    That's exactly what I was thinking of doing - RAID1 the system disk. I know it's unsupported, but with how I have file duplication set-up, the system disk seems to be the "weakest link" in my set-up.

     

    Thanks to everyone who is posting their experiences - it really is a huge help to have so much collective experience & knowledge to peruse!

     

    -mj

     

    You really shouldn't need to RAID your OS drive.  Normally Server Reinstallation will work.  I don't know why it didn't work for you, but I would guess it has to do with your hard drives (either WHS didn't see all of them or your primary drive wasn't in the first-boot slot of your mobo).

    mardi 15 juillet 2008 04:02
    Modérateur
  •  Me wrote:

    Concerning the 'landing zone' problem; I'm sure the Team will find a way to fix this after PP1 is released. For the time being  I may have found a workaround to "force off" data from the primary drive. Need some additional testing to see if this is going to work. If it does it could easily fit into a little tooling that can be run after adding a new drive. I'll keep you guys posted.

    So how does one clear out the landing zone / system drive?

     

    Copy files of the system disk and then re-copy them back. Drive Extender is smart enough not to copy to the system drive when there is room on one of the external drives in the pool:

    Option (1): Copy off all data, then re-copy all back.
    That's no fun!
    Takes a lot of time, spare disks and attention (especially when one has a few of those nice 1 TByte disks)

    Option (2): Find out what files are on the system disk by looking at the tombstones, then re-copy only those.
     Interesting puzzle!?
    But how does one explain the process to Mom or Dad (the one who has a server in the house)

    There has to be another way - something that could be done programmatically....


    And there is as I will explain below:

    With PP1 the data migration algorithm changed in away that DE will now move data off the system disk if free space on the disk gets below 10% and will continue to do so until the amount of free space gets at 20% or more. It will then leave it alone until the next time the 10% limit is reached. As a result the amount of free space on the system disk will stay at about 10-20%.

     

    So why not let DE do the job?

    No problem? Make it think the system disk 10% limit is reached by copying (lots of) dummy data to it and then let DEmigrate data off, Then when DE is done, deleting the dummy data will free up the space on the system disk.

    Nope :-| DE is smart enough to copy the dummy data to one of its external disks in the pool.

     

    How?.

    Do just do the one thing that we are told *not* to do for WHS/RTM: never-ever copy data to the system disk or otherwise DE will not see it creating all sorts of problems. But with PP1 there is a big difference. The new algorithm for calculating space will include any space taken by non-pooled/system data. (Did not realize at the time, but this actually means one can safely use space on drive D: for external applications like a database. This was not possible for RTM as DE - not seeing the space taken by non-pooled files - would get into trouble with calculating free space!)

     

    So ignore the "rule": allocate dummy data on drive D: - anywhere except in the shares,
    As a result DE will calculate free space on the system disk getting below the 10$ limit and start creating free space. And because it is not in the pool DE will leave alone the dummy space allocated and start moving real data. To make sure DE will not stop at 20% free, keep allocating additional space on D: until DE can no longer free up any more space on D:

     

    All this can be done programmatically. So I created a little command line tool that will do just that. It allocates data by creating a bunch of "empty" 1 GByte sized files in a temporary directory at the root of drive D. leaving about 4GBytes of free space for WHS. Creating empty files makes allocation disk pace fast as there is no data copying involved. It then starts monitoring free space on D: and dynamically allocating additional space to keep the amount of free space at about 4 GByte while DE is moving data to external drives. When DE is done (no more data can be allocated for a contiguous period of 30 minutes) all data allocated is removed leaving plenty of space on the system disk.

     

    Now the part I don't like:
    Disclaimer / Warning: this tool is beta. So use it at your own risk.
    I tested it for several hours under different circumstances on WHS/PP1 in a fresh VPC environment as well on the HP Mediasmart. But I can not guarantee that it will not cause problems that I did not think of. I can only say that I trust it to run on my personal WHS (I do have backups). Also I have included the .NET sources for you to evaluate its inner workings. I would very much appreciate some feedback on this

     

    Feel free to download and try: http://vanelsberg.homeserver.com/public/whs/LZreallocator.zip

    - Check out the readme.txt
    - RDP to the WHS/PP1 desktop
    - Copy LZallocator.exe to the desktop and start it by double clicking it
    - From the WHS console: Toggle on/off duplication for one of the shares to wake up DE


    Its best to let the LZallocator tool run until it terminates by it self or just press CTRL-C if you think enough space is freed up.

     

    One last remark:
    This tool does not solve the issue. But it will present a way out when in trouble.
    I am sure the WHS Team will eventually come up with a real solution.

    Theo van Elsberg

    mardi 15 juillet 2008 19:20
    Modérateur
  • MJBos,

    Just noticed that your problem had nothing to do with the landingzone (I did not fully read your problem description when opening from post-alert?) Glad you solved this quickly!

     

    Theo.

    mardi 15 juillet 2008 19:28
    Modérateur
  •  

    Theo,

     

    Your utility worked perfectly for me. 

     

    My setup is 3 x 320GB drives.  I added a 250GB drive last week and noticed my landing zone still had only ~240gb free.  ran your utility and it's right back up to 278 where it should be.

     

    Thanks!

     

    -Tim

    jeudi 17 juillet 2008 17:15
  •  Timmah wrote:

    Your utility worked perfectly for me. 

    Great Tim. Thanks for your feedback!

    jeudi 17 juillet 2008 17:21
    Modérateur
  • Theo I have since rebuilt my WHS, so I do not need to use this utility, but this sounds great.  Very impressive!
    jeudi 17 juillet 2008 19:25
  • Nice work!It's nice to see the community all working together to provide for the needs of others!It's a very neat trick to fix an annoying problem, now its just up to the engineers to integrate something like this into some sort of button in the console to migrate the data as has been previously mentioned and problem solved!

    vendredi 18 juillet 2008 23:30