locked
Filling in the missing DE RRS feed

  • General discussion

  • There are enough developers around here, MVPs and I am sure MS are willing to give a hand that we, the community, should be able to fill in the gap where DE has been removed.

    As I see it DE has two main functions

    1)  Storage pool management - adding/removing and identifying faulty disks in the pool
    2)  Share Level duplication - basically copying data in one physical disk to another and health monitoring to ensure that files are intact

    I think these two requirements can be handled by two add-ins.  One to monitor the physical removal/addition of disks from system events the other that uses another method to provide some level of File Level Duplication.

    What do people think?


    -- Free AV for WHS : http://whsclamav.sourceforge.net/
    Wednesday, November 24, 2010 11:59 AM

All replies

  • There are enough developers around here, MVPs and I am sure MS are willing to give a hand that we, the community, should be able to fill in the gap where DE has been removed.

    As I see it DE has two main functions

    1)  Storage pool management - adding/removing and identifying faulty disks in the pool
    2)  Share Level duplication - basically copying data in one physical disk to another and health monitoring to ensure that files are intact

    I think these two requirements can be handled by two add-ins.  One to monitor the physical removal/addition of disks from system events the other that uses another method to provide some level of File Level Duplication.

    What do people think?


    -- Free AV for WHS : http://whsclamav.sourceforge.net/

    I have thoughts here; I've had them since I found out about this some weeks ago. (Sorry I couldn't say anything, but sometimes an NDA is a pain in the butt, and this wasn't even close to being worth violating mine.)

    I see one add-in, not two. You might build it as two, but they'd be pretty hard to use separately, and wouldn't buy you very much at all (they're synergistic), so just make it one. :)

    Drop me a line in email if you'd like to discuss further. I would not like to see Microsoft involved, if they're even interested, which I very much doubt at this point.


    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)
    Wednesday, November 24, 2010 1:59 PM
    Moderator
  • I envisioned Drive Extender 2 doing basically what v1 does execpt with the following changes:

     

    1. DE should allow scheduled mirror/duplication.  Or a click 'balance now' button.

    2. DE should mirror files not by simply balancing them but by grabbing duplicates from the Volume Shadow Copy, thereby allowing more application compatibility.

    3. Allow using Advanced format 4k sector drives to be used

    4. Have a parity drive for 'invisible bit flip' correction.  Let usage be optional.

     

    Wednesday, November 24, 2010 4:40 PM
  • An add in would be a brilliant answer, and an action I would fully support and assist in the creation of if I can.

    As long as it is as rugged as the current version of DE....!

    Wednesday, November 24, 2010 4:45 PM
  • maybe you can use greyhole, the opensource DE equivalent that is in development?

    http://code.google.com/p/greyhole/

    Wednesday, November 24, 2010 4:46 PM
  • This would be a difficult problem to solve as gracefully as it's currently implemented in WHS.

    First off, you would have to re-implement file sharing so you've got direct access to the network data.  That would also require disabling the OS file sharing services.  So you'd lose the "simple" share functionality built into the OS.  Then you'd have to be able to integrate with security, etc.

    Though, once you got past the hurdle of the sharing protocol, the file management/migration/duplication/etc is actually not all that difficult.

    Wednesday, November 24, 2010 5:25 PM
  • Greyhole? Probably not; it's a tool intended for use on linux. Though it's certainly worth a look.
    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)
    Wednesday, November 24, 2010 5:26 PM
    Moderator
  • It's written in PHP.  Pretty much a non-starter right there.
    Wednesday, November 24, 2010 5:36 PM
  • It's written in PHP.  Pretty much a non-starter right there.
    PHP? Ick. How do they expect to get decent performance with even moderate volumes of data?

    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)
    Wednesday, November 24, 2010 6:19 PM
    Moderator
  • There are enough developers around here, MVPs and I am sure MS are willing to give a hand that we, the community, should be able to fill in the gap where DE has been removed.

    As I see it DE has two main functions

    1)  Storage pool management - adding/removing and identifying faulty disks in the pool
    2)  Share Level duplication - basically copying data in one physical disk to another and health monitoring to ensure that files are intact

    I think these two requirements can be handled by two add-ins.  One to monitor the physical removal/addition of disks from system events the other that uses another method to provide some level of File Level Duplication.

    What do people think?


    -- Free AV for WHS : http://whsclamav.sourceforge.net/


    Hi Al, totally supportive of this.  The devil will be in the detail, i.e. as you dig deeper into the requirements and decide on the design/solution - just look at some of the fundamental differences between DEv1 and DEv2, both meeting the same high level requirements.  It also starts raising questions as to what base OS would it be sat on.  If you add in a few more requirements for example around:

    Streaming
    Automated Backups
    Remote Access
    Dashboard/Connector

    You have practically the full WHS feature set.  Of course that's more work, but if it meant it was independent of say a W2K8R2 base build and could run on Windows 7 it would keep the overall costs down and flexibility up, e.g. if people wanted to incorporate Media Center functionality, or Exchange and Sharepoint on W2K8R2... The reason for mentioning this is that I fear Vail or a WHS2 without DE will never fly, so developing an independent DE for "Vail" may be a dead end in itself.

    Hope this is useful input to the discussion for you.

    Wednesday, November 24, 2010 7:05 PM
  • You have practically the full WHS feature set. Of course that's more work, but if it meant it was independent of say a W2K8R2 base build and could run on Windows 7 it would keep the overall costs down and flexibility up, e.g. if people wanted to incorporate Media Center functionality, or Exchange and Sharepoint on W2K8R2... The reason for mentioning this is that I fear Vail or a WHS2 without DE will never fly, so developing an independent DE for "Vail" may be a dead end in itself._
    If we are going to abandon the idea of a separate OEM box in the closet, I would like to suggest (once again) the idea of packaging WHS as a virtual machine. Having the host be a Windows 7 Media PC (HTPC) solves all the problems with running TV tuners and fancy graphics cards on the WHS, and in general allows the WHS to be very clean/mean/lean -- anything (which seems to be almost everything) not supported on WHS can be run on the host.
     

    David Wilkinson | Visual C++ MVP
    • Edited by davewilk Wednesday, November 24, 2010 7:40 PM formatting
    Wednesday, November 24, 2010 7:35 PM
  • I don't think Al's intention is to replace Windows Home Server (certainly that's not my thought :) ). The linux crowd has tried that without notable success. I believe that Microsoft will at least try to continue with Vail, minus Drive Extender, so replacing DE with some other data protection/high availability mechanism that integrates well with the rest of server storage would be the preferred approach.

    As for the line of business apps you mention putting on Windows Home Server: no. They're a big part of why Drive Extender was removed in the first place. If you want a server that will run line of business apps, Aurora is that way (points vaguely toward Redmond, WA). Simple requirements for a simple consumer oriented solution, please.


    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)

    Wednesday, November 24, 2010 7:36 PM
    Moderator
  • Sorry for diverting the subject - am just thinking ahead, and that WHS2 may never be released as a viable product now.

    In essence I want the WHS concept of a headless unit, under the stairs, with little configuration required.  Basically what we have with WHS and Vail and running an equivalent to DEv1.  For me the reason Linux has never been an alternative is the lack of simplicity and polish to the end user - there isn't a simple all in one Linux solution to WHS in my opinion.  But at this stage I would seriously start considering Linux with a reliable DE solution and less integrated front end, than I would a Windows solution without DE should such a thing ever exist...I don't have any confidence in Greyhole...

    But if a DE solution could be created that would work on both Windows 7 and Windows 2008 R2 as a base OS, then end users can have the flexibility for the "unsupported" solutions they have asked for over the years.  For example if Vail didn't happen, I could perhaps consider Aurora with DE - giving me all the benefits I would want.  As a bonus it wouldn't preclude those that have been pleading for Media Center integration could use Windows 7 as the base, but would have to look for other 3rd party solutions for backup, connector, dashboard etc.  Similarly for those who have wanted Exchange and Sharepoint on WHS.

    Of course the core is DE, the rest can happen generically, especially if the dependency between a 3rd party DE and the base OS is removed.

     

    Wednesday, November 24, 2010 8:03 PM
  • I don't think Al's intention is to replace Windows Home Server (certainly that's not my thought :) ). The linux crowd has tried that without notable success. I believe that Microsoft will at least try to continue with Vail, minus Drive Extender, so replacing DE with some other data protection/high availability mechanism that integrates well with the rest of server storage would be the preferred approach.

    Agreed-  We'll probably have to wait until the next build without DE is available to understand what this might look like, but after that maybe we could collectively decide on a featureset and a rough architecture and work out an add-in solution.  If they ever release an API for Skydrive we could potentially include Skydrive integration too.

    John


    Vail Server HW: Asus socket 775 mobo, E6500 dual core processor. 4 1.5 TB Seagate Barracuda 5400 RPM drives, 1 IDE DVD drive, 2GB RAM, latest build of Vail
    Wednesday, November 24, 2010 8:28 PM
  • > I am sure MS are willing to give a hand
     
    Wishful thinking it is, since I've seen no signal of that. You a message dropped here about killing DE. Period.
    What indications/signals did I miss? There is no MS interaction in any way. Just a one-way-communication "this is it".
     
    > What do people think?
    Nice suggestion, but dead before birth. Personally I wouldn't trust anything suggested since chances are big MS will change things which will break any solution/workaround sooner or later. And I cannot live with that in mind. Add-ins are great for things I don't have to rely on (nice ot have things, but a no go for things I've to to trust very much (rely on).
     
     

    There are enough developers around here, MVPs and I am sure MS are willing to give a hand that we, the community, should be able to fill in the gap where DE has been removed.

    As I see it DE has two main functions

    1)  Storage pool management - adding/removing and identifying faulty disks in the pool
    2)  Share Level duplication - basically copying data in one physical disk to another and health monitoring to ensure that files are intact

    I think these two requirements can be handled by two add-ins.  One to monitor the physical removal/addition of disks from system events the other that uses another method to provide some level of File Level Duplication.

    What do people think?


    -- Free AV for WHS : http://whsclamav.sourceforge.net/


    Hi Al, totally supportive of this.  The devil will be in the detail, i.e. as you dig deeper into the requirements and decide on the design/solution - just look at some of the fundamental differences between DEv1 and DEv2, both meeting the same high level requirements.  It also starts raising questions as to what base OS would it be sat on.  If you add in a few more requirements for example around:

    Streaming
    Automated Backups
    Remote Access
    Dashboard/Connector

    You have practically the full WHS feature set.  Of course that's more work, but if it meant it was independent of say a W2K8R2 base build and could run on Windows 7 it would keep the overall costs down and flexibility up, e.g. if people wanted to incorporate Media Center functionality, or Exchange and Sharepoint on W2K8R2... The reason for mentioning this is that I fear Vail or a WHS2 without DE will never fly, so developing an independent DE for "Vail" may be a dead end in itself.

    Hope this is useful input to the discussion for you.


    Have a nice day!
    Wednesday, November 24, 2010 10:15 PM
  • > You a message dropped here about killing DE. Period.
     
    Must read:
    MS just dropped a message here about killing DE. Period.
    > I am sure MS are willing to give a hand
     
    Wishful thinking it is, since I've seen no signal of that. You a message dropped here about killing DE. Period.
    What indications/signals did I miss? There is no MS interaction in any way. Just a one-way-communication "this is it".
     
    > What do people think?
    Nice suggestion, but dead before birth. Personally I wouldn't trust anything suggested since chances are big MS will change things which will break any solution/workaround sooner or later. And I cannot live with that in mind. Add-ins are great for things I don't have to rely on (nice ot have things, but a no go for things I've to to trust very much (rely on).
     
     

    There are enough developers around here, MVPs and I am sure MS are willing to give a hand that we, the community, should be able to fill in the gap where DE has been removed.

    As I see it DE has two main functions

    1)  Storage pool management - adding/removing and identifying faulty disks in the pool
    2)  Share Level duplication - basically copying data in one physical disk to another and health monitoring to ensure that files are intact

    I think these two requirements can be handled by two add-ins.  One to monitor the physical removal/addition of disks from system events the other that uses another method to provide some level of File Level Duplication.

    What do people think?


    -- Free AV for WHS : http://whsclamav.sourceforge.net/


    Hi Al, totally supportive of this.  The devil will be in the detail, i.e. as you dig deeper into the requirements and decide on the design/solution - just look at some of the fundamental differences between DEv1 and DEv2, both meeting the same high level requirements.  It also starts raising questions as to what base OS would it be sat on.  If you add in a few more requirements for example around:

    Streaming
    Automated Backups
    Remote Access
    Dashboard/Connector

    You have practically the full WHS feature set.  Of course that's more work, but if it meant it was independent of say a W2K8R2 base build and could run on Windows 7 it would keep the overall costs down and flexibility up, e.g. if people wanted to incorporate Media Center functionality, or Exchange and Sharepoint on W2K8R2... The reason for mentioning this is that I fear Vail or a WHS2 without DE will never fly, so developing an independent DE for "Vail" may be a dead end in itself.

    Hope this is useful input to the discussion for you.


    Have a nice day!

    Have a nice day!
    Wednesday, November 24, 2010 10:17 PM
  • There is FlexRaid View being developed. It is basically the same thing as DE v1 but it can work on any Windows including Server 2008R2 and also on Linux.
    I don't use it because I'm happy with WHS v1 DE but it may be an alternative to some. It probably doesn't have duplication but FlexRaid Basic works on top of that so there is parity protection (there is even RAID6 engine).
    http://openegg.org/forums/posts/list/155.page
    BTW, both FlexRaid and FlexRaid View were developed by a single person. I think maybe Microsoft should hire him. These DE v2 news is a big disappointment. Not many reasons to use WHS anymore. I guess centralized PC backup is the only useful WHS feature that is left.
    • Edited by micksh Thursday, November 25, 2010 2:38 AM corrected link
    Thursday, November 25, 2010 2:36 AM
  • RAID. Modern RAID controllers are fast, reliable, can be easy to setup and work pretty well. Heck, even firmware, or OS software RAID works well. OEMs can (and have) written wizards to make RAID controller setup a snap.

    Good riddance to drive extender. The design was fundamentally flawed for people with large amounts (4TB+) of data, and anyone technical knew it. Yes, you have a lot of whining right now from people whose joy in life was attaching all their old obsolete 200GB, 320GB and 500GB drives into a giant JBOD of a home server. Realistically though, 2TB can be had for around $100 now. Using older, small drives is plain silly.

     

    Thursday, November 25, 2010 5:26 AM
  • This is exactly what I thought too. It's not a problem to implement DE, it's a problem of intercepting SMB read/write requests, and then pointing them to the right disk/folder. I was looking for some sort of way to plug-in into SMB (through callbacks?), couldn't find anything valuable that I could share in here..
    Thursday, November 25, 2010 6:12 AM
  • RAID. Modern RAID controllers are fast, reliable, can be easy to setup and work pretty well. Heck, even firmware, or OS software RAID works well. OEMs can (and have) written wizards to make RAID controller setup a snap.

    Good riddance to drive extender. The design was fundamentally flawed for people with large amounts (4TB+) of data, and anyone technical knew it. Yes, you have a lot of whining right now from people whose joy in life was attaching all their old obsolete 200GB, 320GB and 500GB drives into a giant JBOD of a home server. Realistically though, 2TB can be had for around $100 now. Using older, small drives is plain silly.

     


    Only the problem is.....
    Some or many regular/normal consumers don't even know what they are.
    And even if they knew it, they won't even try use it, cause of problem of raid.

    Thursday, November 25, 2010 6:46 AM
  • I hated DE AND DEv2 anyway.

    Very sort sighted both of them (each for their generation).

    THE SOLUTION IS A JBOD SYSTEM WITH PARITY and talking about FILE BASED system so that it doesn't break (or depend on) any file system. Something like unRAID for Windows.

    FlexRAID is moving to be something like that, but currently it's an "one man show" (with that "one man" limiting the show to one - for now), it is "snapshot" based (not real-time) and depends too much on config files, without the proper documentation yet. He is not to blame for that though, it is just that the project is still a small free project (built in some of the free time of its author) with small user footprint. FlexRAID will satisfy the need for data recovery (it's embedded file-based RAID engines) and JBOD although I tottaly (but tottaly) disagree with the author's take on how to implement JBOD (he doesn't like to automatically merge folders for some unknown to me reason).

    For the JBOD part a team has already stepped forward, doing a very good job with Liquesce. They started the proper way: GUI from day 1 (almost) including a tray icon, service, open source. Currently needs to overcome some limitations of the library used, Dokan (same like FlexRAID) esp. in x64 environments.

    I don't give links because really Goog... erm... Bing, is your friend.

    PLEASE PEOPLE SUPPORT BOTH OF THOSE PROJECTS. USERS WILL HAVE SIGNIFICANT BENEFIT FROM THOSE TWO GOING FORWARD!

     

    Thursday, November 25, 2010 12:40 PM
  • Ajy...

    "real consumers", are simply going to buy an OEM 8TB WHS NAS, preconfigured with RAID5 protection. Problem solved. They won't buy individual drives.

    "Real consumers" buy fully loaded Netgear, Buffalo, etc NAS devices all the time. These all use RAID. Not sure what the issue is here?

     

    Thursday, November 25, 2010 7:11 PM
  • RAID5 is hardly consumer stuff, RAID anything isn't consumer. Try recovering from a broken array. Try dealing with drive replacement when the model you built your array with is NLA, e.g. the WD EADS 2TB are very difficult to find now.

     

    I for one am not looking forward to trusting my 12TB of data to opensource anything with daily or weekly code changes. Nulusios illustrates the risk to your data very well in describing an all too common opensource arrogance on the part of the original creator. I will be following the Liquesce project though, on the surface it appears that this is focused and actually has a design (instead of coding from the imagination only). The main thing we need is a JBOD solution. Duplication etc is secondary IMO.

     

    Gerrit

    Thursday, November 25, 2010 8:08 PM
  • First, I'd like to add a vote to the "please bring back DE" camp.

    For me, DE was, above all, a way to finally stop having to worry about where files were physically stored.  No more splitting movie folders across drives, no more worring about matching drives for RAID configurations, I could just plug my TB-sized drives in and they'd work. 

    I agree, right now hard drive capacity growth seems to be outpacing our ability to fill it.  But with HD video growing in popularity, 3D HD in its infancy, and broadband speeds increasing, we'll soon once again have folders larger than drives, and will again need drive pooling technology.

    Without DE, WHS essentially becomes an expensive NAS device - where's the value-add in that?  MS, please bring back DE and please don't kill a product in a category where you actually have a competitive advantage!

    Thursday, November 25, 2010 9:08 PM
  • Proteus7 - Your logic is lacking though.  How many "whiners" where there when we all had 20mb hard drives who thought we'd never need any more.  Or when we hit the GB barrier.  Something will come along with huge files, and TB drives will be like GB ones used to be. 

    DE wasn't perfect, but it fit the problem perfectly.  So call us whiners all you want, but MS screwed the pooch on this one.  I'll keep my V1 server until there is another all-in-one solution available to take it's place.  I'm not an MVP, I don't work in the MS administration world.  I'm a CS guy doing other things now and I have no desire to learn how to set up raid or linux or greyhole (whatever that is).  I want something I can turn on and have it work.  And since the V1 beta, it has (I didn't use any of the things that corrupted the original DE implementation). 

    So swing your leg off your high horse and use that influence they give you when you become MVP's and get DE put back in, or you won't have anything to be an MVP for.  We'll stop buying WHS, we'll stop recommending it, and we'll actively lobby against our friends and family buying it. 

    Kurt Sparkman


    Sparky
    Thursday, November 25, 2010 10:44 PM
  • I must say I find the statements from MS similar to "...we're working closely with our OEM partners" and whatnot "for solutions" for this DE removal realy says it all.

    No more home built WHS hardware.

    They don't want it.

    They don't need it.

    With this move, MS clearly closes the door to this part of the community, one that really holds the WHS banner up high.
    I feel a bit insulted, frankly...like someone just flipped me a birdy..

    But, I'm willing to bide the time and see what next Vail Beta brings to us.
    Or the community. An Add In for this purpose would be amazing!

    Edit: I must change my signature. The Vail machine is no more.

     


    One WHS v1 machine in the basement with a mixed setup of harddrives in and outside the storage pool. And now, next to it, a Vail Refresh brother for beta duties.
    Thursday, November 25, 2010 11:05 PM
  • Removing DE I believe is a big mistake. I do not want to juggle multiple software and setup. If microsoft will not make VAIL available for home built hardware, that is also a shame. For the needs of any home user, with an easy setup, WHS far outranks anything else. Of course, not everyone will use it, but it is a seller of the microsoft brand which influences me to keep a windows desktop. There are other reasons also, but losing one reason like WHS is a great loss which will get me thinking about other OS.
    Friday, November 26, 2010 12:40 AM
  • … The main thing we need is a JBOD solution. Duplication etc is secondary IMO.

    JBOD is easy. It's built into Windows. DE gave you that, with lower performance than the Windows equivalent, but it also gave you high availability/reliability for your shares: lose a drive and all you need to do to regain access to your data is replace it, DE would take care of the re-build behind the scenes. My opinion is that the availability/reliability is more important for the consumer; they don't back their servers up, and JBOD by itself will put your data at greater risk than just several disks that you access and manage individually.
    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)
    Friday, November 26, 2010 2:34 AM
    Moderator
  • JBOD is easy. It's built into Windows. 


    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)

    Hi Ken

    Is this via spanned volumes? If so then yes it does put your data at more risk, lose one drive and you lose everything. (I did a LOT more reading after my post :-))

    What I meant by 'duplication is secondary' is that this is easier to solve with existing packages such as Liquesce. DE would appear to use a similar snapshot duplication approach.

    I think I will wait for the next release of Vail to see how MS handle the gap. My present WHS will do just fine for a while yet, 8 2TB drives and counting :-)

    Friday, November 26, 2010 2:51 PM
  • Personally, I think FlexRaid is likely to be perfectly adequate, with an appropriate wrapper to configure it on installation and integrate it with the Dashboard. I haven't looked into Liquesce, but suspect it's going to be harder to take from a "techie toy" to something Joe Average can install and use easily. Never forget: you and I are not the target market for a consumer product. 
    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)
    Friday, November 26, 2010 3:38 PM
    Moderator
  • Proteus7 - Your logic is lacking though.  How many "whiners" where there when we all had 20mb hard drives who thought we'd never need any more.  Or when we hit the GB barrier.  Something will come along with huge files, and TB drives will be like GB ones used to be. 

    DE wasn't perfect, but it fit the problem perfectly.  So call us whiners all you want, but MS screwed the pooch on this one.  I'll keep my V1 server until there is another all-in-one solution available to take it's place.  I'm not an MVP, I don't work in the MS administration world.  I'm a CS guy doing other things now and I have no desire to learn how to set up raid or linux or greyhole (whatever that is).  I want something I can turn on and have it work.  And since the V1 beta, it has (I didn't use any of the things that corrupted the original DE implementation). 

    So swing your leg off your high horse and use that influence they give you when you become MVP's and get DE put back in, or you won't have anything to be an MVP for.  We'll stop buying WHS, we'll stop recommending it, and we'll actively lobby against our friends and family buying it. 

    Kurt Sparkman


    Sparky
    Sparky I agree with you perfectly. I built my WHS almost 2 yrs back with a combination of PATA & SATA drives for < $400. So far it has worked perfectly and I intend to keep it as far as it can go. I looked at the Drobo FS just now to compare it to my WHS build and wasnt too impressed. Agree it has "BeyondRAID" which is basically DE. Unless I am missing something it is mainly a file share device and cannot be used for image based backups. And that solution is selling for $699. I used to recommend WHS to my colleagues and they were impressed with all the remote login capabitlites etc. So it has been a disappointment when I learned that DE is being taken out. I just dont get it. Couldnt they have offered a "basic" Vail, with well basic WHS backup functionality, and then a "Premium" version with DE. The DE technology is already proven for home use so why bother with server side stuff.

    Anything that doesnt have a self limiting factor is of the devil.
    Friday, November 26, 2010 3:42 PM
  • > The design was fundamentally flawed for people with large amounts (4TB+) of data, and anyone technical knew it.
    Why? It just works fine here. )specs below.
     
     
    >Realistically though, 2TB can be had for around $100 now. Using older, small drives is plain silly.
     
    In what way is this relevant? I've three 1.5 TB and one 2 TB and I still don';t want to see DE go away.
    Why? Because is does make it easy to add/remove a drive and get files duplicated and I don´t have to care about filesize related to space left on a drive.
    It's all I need.
     
     
    Yes, you have a lot of whining right now from people whose joy in life was attaching all their old obsolete 200GB, 320GB and 500GB drives into a giant
    > JBOD of a home server.
     
    I do that too JBOD.. but I don´t have the drives you mention in my WHS. )see specs above. Btw, that is exactly what WHS is for )maybe you didn´t know...
     
    >  Realistically though, 2TB can be had for around $100 now.
    So....btw.. 74 Euro here for a TB drive ..
     
     

    RAID. Modern RAID controllers are fast, reliable, can be easy to setup and work pretty well. Heck, even firmware, or OS software RAID works well. OEMs can (and have) written wizards to make RAID controller setup a snap.

    Good riddance to drive extender. The design was fundamentally flawed for people with large amounts (4TB+) of data, and anyone technical knew it. Yes, you have a lot of whining right now from people whose joy in life was attaching all their old obsolete 200GB, 320GB and 500GB drives into a giant JBOD of a home server. Realistically though, 2TB can be had for around $100 now. Using older, small drives is plain silly.

     


    Only the problem is.....
    Some or many regular/normal consumers don't even know what they are.
    And even if they knew it, they won't even try use it, cause of problem of raid.


    Have a nice day!
    Friday, November 26, 2010 6:33 PM
  • Personally, I think FlexRaid is likely to be perfectly adequate, with an appropriate wrapper to configure it on installation and integrate it with the Dashboard. I haven't looked into Liquesce, but suspect it's going to be harder to take from a "techie toy" to something Joe Average can install and use easily. Never forget: you and I are not the target market for a consumer product. 
    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)

    Hi Ken

    Darn, I meant FlexRaid, not Liquesce...

    I try hard to look at things WHS from a WAF point of view. I love WHS present version for that reason, I can be a 'consumer' for a change :-) and tinker with other things such as FreeSWITCH instead.

    I'll check out FlexRaid as well but can you confirm for me that re: JBOD on windows that you were referring to spanned volumes? Or is there yanfs that I should have found by now :-)

    Gerrit

    Friday, November 26, 2010 8:18 PM
  • Yes, Gerrit, dynamic disks/spanned volumes. They work quite well until a drive fails.
    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)
    Friday, November 26, 2010 9:28 PM
    Moderator
  • Why was DEv2 fundamentally flawed? Its been reiterated on these forums numerous times, but to recap.

    DEv2 had massive overhead. Data protection required a 60% decrease in total storage space. That was simply unacceptable to anyone with a large storage library. Yes, 2TB drives are cheap, but that still doesn't mean I'm willing to sacrifice 14.5TB of my 24TB array for data protection. Even someone with a modest 4 drive, 8TB config would be making large sacrifices here...

    DEv2 was unsafe without data protection. Yes, it had additional ECC. But the 1GB "chunking" mechanism essentially turned your storage into a giant RAID0 array, where any SINGLE drive failure would result in data loss.

    DEv2 had appcompat issues. These were being chased down all the time. Everyone remembers the nightmare that was V1 appcompat, with certain applications being deemed "unsafe" and people loosing email and photo libraries.

    Bottom line. The primary goal of any storage system is to prevent data corruption, and keep your data safe. RAID has been doing this for decades, and is now easier to use than ever. I strongly suspect OEMs are simply going to sell servers with RAID protected storage, configured out of the box, and be done with it.

     

     

     

     

    Saturday, November 27, 2010 3:50 PM
  • The problem is cost.  The full-blown raid controllers that support adding another drive and then expanding the raid will both drive the cost of these "CONSUMER" boxes up and remove the simplicity that WHS v1 users expect from the product.

    Drive Extender V1 and V2 are already developed why not let the option exist but allow OEM's/Consumers to go the raid route if they choose to.

    Saturday, November 27, 2010 6:30 PM
  • ... Data protection required a 60% decrease in total storage space. ...

    56%. Trivially simple math, please get it right:

    • 100 units - 12% off the top for ECC leaves 88 units.
    • 88 units / 2 for duplication leaves 44 units of available storage.

    56% overhead. 


    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)
    Sunday, November 28, 2010 5:51 AM
    Moderator
  • I hope this doesn't lead people to use the RAID option on onboard SATA controllers (like Silicon Image), as that could result in a world of hurt down the road.  Trouble is that hardware RAID controllers are expensive and that's why DE was a popular alternative.  Since DE v1 sits on top of NTFS and has been proven (after some teething problems), why not retain it as an option?

    Sunday, November 28, 2010 6:08 AM
  • 56%. Trivially simple math, please get it right:
     
    100 units - 12% off the top for ECC leaves 88 units.
    88 units / 2 for duplication leaves 44 units of available storage.
     
    56% overhead.
    Some might call that 100*56/44 = 127% overhead...
     

    David Wilkinson | Visual C++ MVP
    Sunday, November 28, 2010 10:05 AM
  • ... Data protection required a 60% decrease in total storage space. ...

    56%. Trivially simple math, please get it right:

     

    • 100 units - 12% off the top for ECC leaves 88 units.
    • 88 units / 2 for duplication leaves 44 units of available storage.

     

    56% overhead. 


    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)

    Yes, trivial, but still wrong expected! Each 100 GB stored data contain payload and 12 percent ECC overhead. So, 100 GB data correspond 112 percent. 100 / 112 * 100 = 89,29 GB (Payload), 100-89, 29 = 10,79 GB ECC overhead.
    Sunday, November 28, 2010 1:46 PM
  • I would just like to say that if Drive Extender is is being deprecated it is because the team believes they can do a better job placing the same resources on building the same simplicity based on RAID technology.

    Fundamentally, I feel the DE project was a wasteful recreation of the wheel. What came out of it was the concept of simple data management with the ability to add disks without the user being required to get technical. I believe the team will be striving for this same goal with the current direction.

    Although there is concern here from those of you who are watching Microsoft's heart beat, I believe you will see the solution which you have always wanted come out in the next version of Home Server. That solution will be higher performance and be more reliable.

    So enjoy the talk but don't lose faith that the best home server is about to come out pumped for a great user experience.

     


    Jeff Loucks | Available Technology | 888-474-2237 | 905-646-1927 | http://msmvps.com/blogs/jeffloucks
    Sunday, November 28, 2010 2:40 PM
  • This is all academic, but that's not how Drive Extender worked. It didn't take your 100 GB of disk and add 12 GB of disk for ECC (that calls for magic, not programming). It took your 100 GB of disk and took 12% off the top for ECC. My math is right, and Dave Wilkinson's alternate math arriving at 127% is also right from a different perspective (though I like mine better for obvious reasons :) ).

    Again, this is all academic. There is no longer going to be any overhead imposed by Drive Extender as supplied by Microsoft, because there will no longer be a Drive Extender as supplied by Microsoft. Probably there will be other solutions supplied by add-in developers, and/or by OEMs. Most likely whatever is created to fill the gap will be harder to use, and will miss significantly on one or more of the capabilities that Drive Extender supplied for consumers. But I do expect replacements for DE eventually. Probably not for Vail release; schedule skip is implicated in the removal of DE in the first place and a DE-like set of functionality is not easy to pull out of a hat (which should be obvious). But eventually.


    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)
    Sunday, November 28, 2010 2:52 PM
    Moderator
  • I would just like to say that if Drive Extender is is being deprecated it is because the team believes they can do a better job placing the same resources on building the same simplicity based on RAID technology.

    Fundamentally, I feel the DE project was a wasteful recreation of the wheel. What came out of it was the concept of simple data management with the ability to add disks without the user being required to get technical. I believe the team will be striving for this same goal with the current direction.

    Although there is concern here from those of you who are watching Microsoft's heart beat, I believe you will see the solution which you have always wanted come out in the next version of Home Server. That solution will be higher performance and be more reliable.

    So enjoy the talk but don't lose faith that the best home server is about to come out pumped for a great user experience.

     


    Jeff Loucks | Available Technology | 888-474-2237 | 905-646-1927 | http://msmvps.com/blogs/jeffloucks

    I'm all ears Jeff ;)

    And will that solution be just as easy to administer, and just as easy to expand?

    But if it's going to be a better job, are you confident that it will be for WHS users - and not just OEMs and SBS users - as that's where the direction seems to be being set from?

    Sunday, November 28, 2010 3:04 PM
  • >I would just like to say that if Drive Extender is is being deprecated it is because the team believes they can do a better job placing the same resources on building the same simplicity based on RAID technology.
     
    Did you even read what Microsoft said? They said that they are
    removing DE because they're going with common code for SBS, storage
    server and WHS, and that DE broke line of business apps. -- it had
    nothing to do with WHS and being able to do it better.
     
    I suppose they could do it better but it's going to cost more and
    nobody will buy it.
     
    >Although there is concern here from those of you who are watching Microsoft's heart beat, I believe you will see the solution which you have always wanted come out in the next version of Home Server. That solution will be higher performance and be more >reliable.
     
    Not a chance unless they fork WHS off from SBS and start thinking
    about what's good for WHS (and the home consumer) again.
     
    >So enjoy the talk but don't lose faith that the best home server is about to come out pumped for a great user experience.
     
    I don't think anyone is enjoying this...
     
     

    Bob Comer - Microsoft MVP Virtual Machine
    Sunday, November 28, 2010 3:53 PM
  • >There is no longer going to be any overhead imposed by Drive Extender as supplied by Microsoft, because there will no longer be a Drive Extender as supplied by Microsoft.
     
    RAID will also add overhead, RAID 1, the most likely, has a 50%
    overhead.  RAID 5 is better, but more expensive to implement, you need
    more disks and cheap motherboard RAID controllers are not good enough.
     
     

    Bob Comer - Microsoft MVP Virtual Machine
    Sunday, November 28, 2010 3:57 PM
  • To me, this can all be handled with scripts/GUI.  RAID is a distractor.  Most of those complaining about the loss of DE see the loss of user level simplicity, not the underlying tech.  These functionalities can be easily replaced with good GUI and scripts.  

     

    This is what I would like to see:

     

    ·         Use a similar wizard to the add drive wizard that is there today.

     

    ·         Use a HD space monitoring system that suggest the user move their shares over the HDs efficiently. (Monitor is there, now do GUIize it)

     

    ·         Use the backup process(robocopy) to duplicate folders to a duplication drive pool.

     

     

    HD monitoring:

     

    Alert:  We noticed your E: drive is getting full.  Please visit the drive management tab and add another drive to storage.

     

    Drive tab:

     

    [Similar to what is there today]

     

    Storage pool:

    C:\sys                    60GB                     20GB free

    D:\data                 940GB                   20GB free

    E:\shares             1990GB                 100GB free

     

    Duplication pool:

    None

     

    Backup pool:

    1 backup drive, 2TB, 80% full.

     

    Our analysis did not find enough HD space on your other drives to balance your shares.  Please add a new HD to the storage pool.

     

    Great, we noticed you added a new HD to the storage pool How would you like to use it?

     

     

    Add Drive wizard:

     

    You just added a drive, what would you like to do?

    ·         Add drive to storage?

    ·         Add drive to duplication?

    ·         Add drive to backup?

     

    Storage.  You chose storage.  When looking at your shares, we recommend you move your video and photo shares to the new drive.  Your new drive has 2000GB of storage. Would you like to do this?

     

    Current HD D:\data (89% full) 988GB

     

    Videos:                         500GB

    TV:                                 20GB

    Photos:                        200GB

    User Folders:             100GB

    Music:                           100GB

     

    Great.   Tonight during the backup process we will move your Video and Photo shares to the new drive.  Would you like to begin the migration now instead?   (server performance might be impacted) Yes, start the migration now.  No, run the migration tonight.

     

    In the morning, we will alert you to the success of the share migration.

     

    Duplication.  You chose to add your new drive to be a duplication share.  During the backup process, WHS will copy your shares chosen for duplication to this new drive.  What shares would you like duplicated?

     

    Current HD D:\data (89% full) 988GB  New HD E:\Duplication   (0% full) 1998 GB

     

    Videos:                         500GB  Y/N?

    TV:                                 20GB     Y/N?

    Photos:                        200GB   Y/N?

    User Folders:             100GB   Y/N?

    Music:                           100GB   Y/N?

     

    Backup.  You chose to add the new drive to backup.  This drive will be added to your backup set.  Since this is your first backup drive, all backups will be copied here and managed by WHS.  If you add a second drive to the backup set WHS will manage that for you as well, allowing offsite storage of files.  Do you have an online backup provider? Would you like one?

     

    The simple management feature is what everyone is complaining about.  Drive management can be wizardized.  The existing consoles are almost there as is.

     

    ·         I think you get exactly the functionality that everyone is bemoaning the loss of, without the complication of DE.  People want the ease of adding and managing storage. 

    ·         This requires no fancy underpinnings.

    ·         This moves the duplication process offline, rather than live.  Notice that no one is screaming about the live duplication feature? The same functionality is there, duplication in the case of HD failure.  In fact, I would say a near copy backup of shares called duplication is better than live as it protects against overwrites and viruses.  (scripted robocopy + vol shadow copy for history)

    ·         This can be added easily through consoles, scripts and GUIs.  Windows does not need to be changed to give this functionality.

    ·         The reality of DE never lived up to the promise.  Drive letters where never replaced, only hidden. Remember full D: drives?  Just one layer down, there were drive letters.

    ·         The share storage approach does not involve RAID, nor is it exclusive of hardware RAID.

    ·         To any 3<sup>rd</sup> party program, the shares are shares.  Backup programs, offsite backup programs, A/V programs, QB, everything is the same.  

    ·         If the offsite backup programs want to get fancy, they can use the duplication drive for performance reasons.

     

    The shares screen is where the magic happens.    Select what drive the share is on.  Is it duplicated?  Is it backed up?

     

    Share:                                                           Drive?   Duplicated?                        Backed Up?                        Backed up online?        Status

    Videos:                         500GB                   E:            N                                             Y  G:                                       N                                     Healthy

    TV:                                 20GB                     E:            N                                             N                                             N                                     Healthy

    Photos:                        200GB                   E:            Y                                              Y  G:                                       Y  Carbonite                Warning

    User Folders:             100GB                   D:            Y  E:                                        Y  G:                                       Y  SkyDrive                  Healthy

    Music:                           100GB                   D:            Y  E:                                        Y  G:                                       N                                     Healthy

    PC backups                 600GB                   D:            N                                             Y  G:                                       Y  Grama’s House        Critical

     

     

     

    I have shares in my system I do not want backed up.  I have shares I do not want duplicated.  This is all doable with check boxes and radio buttons.  Once selected, there is no reason the user has to think anymore about it.  The process of creating a new share, copying files, deleting the old share can all be done with scripts and robocopy.  It can be done now, or after hours.  Drive space monitors can be setup to suggest better share management.  Any add/remove drive scenario ticks through the available shares, the available drive space, duplication, and suggests moving the shares to best balance the load.  If the share is already duplicated, then run the duplicate (robocopy) process to update it,  then the drive can be removed now and rebuilt during backup.  If not, then offer to duplicate now.  Duplicate now can even be a manual process wizard launched from the shares tab, since it just runs robocopy.  If you want to live dangerously, you can even have a “Let Windows manage it for you” button.  I think windows has the same problem once the video folder gets too big for the drive it is on and no other drive has space, so I am not sure it does any better, but it might make some feel better.  The HD space monitor can be as simple as a space check, or as fancy as projecting drive/share usage based on growth formulas.  Both are in SBS now.  Similar to the “fix it” button, there is no reason a share management wizard cannot do these calculations, suggest a best course of action, and do it.  If MS wants to get fancy, they can use dynamic disks, Libraries, DFS etc to hide the drive letters with technologies they all ready have.  

    To me, the management of shared folders provides all of the functionality and simlplicity DE did.

     

     

     

    Sunday, November 28, 2010 4:31 PM
  • How complicated the technique which gives the overhead may always work. The 12 percent statement is a clear and simple mathematical statement about storage consumption that is true or false. If at 100 GB of user data, the data under the DE storage system are (without duplication) larger than 112 GB, then, assuming that DE is able to count the number of GB occupied by a write process, the 12 percent ECC overhead from Microsoft was incorrectly estimated and the corresponding statement wrong.

    But I would like to appear not opinionated especially since DE is past.

    It amazes me however, that the technical and economic expertise of Microsoft that decision DE abandon based is estimated as low. Else this pathetic put call to Microsoft, reverse the decision, cannot be explained.
    Microsoft encountered errors in DE1 even after the bug fix. Is there a version DE2. Microsoft encountered errors in DE2. Two attempts must meet to review the approach does not work.
    As a user I am Microsoft even grateful for the abandonment of the concept and the reorientation.
    In addition, problems with large files and large storage pools and the problems of performance and efficiency. These people simply ignores all these things and the early criticism and alerts from experienced and technically savvy users in this forum. Instead the wishful thinking you could secure and high-performance storage system to a so-called average user around construct. These views are missed. DE nice talk.

    I am very relieved that Microsoft towards a new approach. And I share the view of Jeff Loucks essentially.

    Sunday, November 28, 2010 5:20 PM
  • > In addition, problems with large files and large storage pools and the problems of performance and efficiency.
     
    No problems here with large files and I think 99,787798% of the WHS-users  don't give a S... about performance. And efficiency.. LOL.. 2 TB drives for 74 Euro...
     
    > write process,
    > 12 percent ECC overhead
    Bla bla bla .. who cares...
     
    It's the ease of WHS (V1) that has (or should I say .. had) all the attraction. All the other ......is for "techies" that are proud announcing tech stuff (wow.. I found the performance is 2,457897% lower than bla bla bla etc... Really WHS - Windows HOME Server - users don't even want to understand. Simply because it's not a problem for them.
    Suggestion for the "techies"... get a windows server 2008 R2 / SBS or what ever.. but just don't think you are the audience for WHS. And if the Windows Server 2008 R2 / SBS are to expensive.. just delay buying it and just take some extra time to save the extra money needed :-).
     
     
     

    How complicated the technique which gives the overhead may always work. The 12 percent statement is a clear and simple mathematical statement about storage consumption that is true or false. If at 100 GB of user data, the data under the DE storage system are (without duplication) larger than 112 GB, then, assuming that DE is able to count the number of GB occupied by a write process, the 12 percent ECC overhead from Microsoft was incorrectly estimated and the corresponding statement wrong.

    But I would like to appear not opinionated especially since DE is past.

    It amazes me however, that the technical and economic expertise of Microsoft that decision DE abandon based is estimated as low. Else this pathetic put call to Microsoft, reverse the decision, cannot be explained.
    Microsoft encountered errors in DE1 even after the bug fix. Is there a version DE2. Microsoft encountered errors in DE2. Two attempts must meet to review the approach does not work.
    As a user I am Microsoft even grateful for the abandonment of the concept and the reorientation.
    In addition, problems with large files and large storage pools and the problems of performance and efficiency. These people simply ignores all these things and the early criticism and alerts from experienced and technically savvy users in this forum. Instead the wishful thinking you could secure and high-performance storage system to a so-called average user around construct. These views are missed. DE nice talk.

    I am very relieved that Microsoft towards a new approach. And I share the view of Jeff Loucks essentially.


    Have a nice day!
    Sunday, November 28, 2010 7:39 PM
  • > I feel the DE project was a wasteful recreation of the wheel.
     
    I feel nothing.. I *know* it is/was great working in V1. How? Because it works for me great. No problems addind a drive, not problems removing one that is failing (ok.. same drives.. which is in SATA 1/2/3/4.. but that was fixed in Vail). Basicly I think we don't even need V2 (said that since the first version of V2.. nothing new other than some UI refresh). So there wasn't even a "wheel-like there is on V1" and I considered it as "first-born-WHS-V1".
     
    > So enjoy the talk but don't lose faith that the best home server is about to come out pumped for a great user experience.
    > ... because the team believes they can do a better job placing the same resources on building the same simplicity based on RAID technology.
     
    I'm the client/user of WHS .. and it's up to me whether it's a better job or not. And I would have more trust/faith if the announcement was done together with new a DE-less build. SInce that was not the case.. I don't trust the team at all. I still remember it took a very long time they confirmed/admitted the serious bug in V1 and it took even much much longer to fix it. I wouldn;t be surprised if Vail will be scrapped and V1 will get PP 4,5,6 etc. I would love it . extension of V1 (since V2 didn't have anything wow-new to offer anyway) :-)
     
     
    > I believe you will see the solution which you have always wanted come out in the next version of Home Server. That solution will be higher performance and be more reliable.
     
    I have what I want in V1 (except some minor nice -to-have-things) already.
     
    > That solution will be higher performance and be more reliable.
    So *you* know I need this (over DE)? Please speak for yourself, not for me. And basicly you say this I should feel the flipside of this (loosing DE) is worth it?
    Nah.. at least not for me.
     
     
    PS: In general.. I hat to see to many MVP are in defending-MS mode more and more nowadays..
     

    I would just like to say that if Drive Extender is is being deprecated it is because the team believes they can do a better job placing the same resources on building the same simplicity based on RAID technology.

    Fundamentally, I feel the DE project was a wasteful recreation of the wheel. What came out of it was the concept of simple data management with the ability to add disks without the user being required to get technical. I believe the team will be striving for this same goal with the current direction.

    Although there is concern here from those of you who are watching Microsoft's heart beat, I believe you will see the solution which you have always wanted come out in the next version of Home Server. That solution will be higher performance and be more reliable.

    So enjoy the talk but don't lose faith that the best home server is about to come out pumped for a great user experience.

     


    Jeff Loucks | Available Technology | 888-474-2237 | 905-646-1927 | http://msmvps.com/blogs/jeffloucks

    Have a nice day!
    Sunday, November 28, 2010 7:57 PM
  • Could someone please explain the problem with using the old DE from whs1 in Vail? It's been working fine in my whs1, but it's a bit slow when transferring huge files to the server.

    Monday, November 29, 2010 10:08 AM
  • Thank You Leen, your comments are right on the nail.

    Microsoft has lost the plot with WHS and is now in the "Trust me, I know what you want more than you do" mode. Which is pure arrogance and using smoke and mirrors to hide the fact they are unable to produce what they had specified previously. While I understand things can change, the way this was handled by the so called management of the project is disgusting.

    It is very obvious that there are a few people in this thread who have Microsoft tattooed on their forehead and who are trying to fight the fires created by an incredibly stupid decision. It tends to become glaringly obvious to me atleast, when they are more interested in arguing with Ken over the disk cost of duplication rather than the real issue involved. That is, without the simplicity of DE, WHS is less than nothing.  

    I can see no reason why the DE from WHSv1 could not be ported over and tweaked to help alieviate the streaming and other issue's that can occur when it kicks too often. I would not have thought it too difficult to add a GUI to DE that would allow broad brush type changes to DE so that if a user wanted to, they could have migrator run at a specified time when the machine is not being used or to have the option to monitor streaming and not kick in when a movie is being watched. While I am not a programmer I suspect this would not be very hard to accomplish.

    The previous post by fierrpawz is also very interesting and covers most things that are my concerns, with the exception, unless I missed it on the read through, of notifying you about a failing disk and handling its replacement.

    Thanks again Leen and keep up the good work.

    Dave

     

    • Edited by frogz1 Monday, November 29, 2010 8:23 PM Typo
    Monday, November 29, 2010 8:21 PM
  • "As for the line of business apps you mention putting on Windows Home Server: no. They're a big part of why Drive Extender was removed in the first place."

    IMO.. as soon as they decided to make WHS both a home solution and a small business solution is when they screwed up. There needs to be a truly home user friendly solution for storage, backup and sharing, and streaming media to & from all home-based PCs, without trying to implement features the small business users want or need. Now with removing DE, they are even leaning more to the small business user and leaning more away from the home user. For me WHS v2 is DEAD.

    Art (artfudd) Folden
    ------------------------------
    "Ken Warren [MVP]" wrote in message news:1da05afe-ae4b-4982-a1ee-c0c054137df1@communitybridge.codeplex.com...

    I don't think Al's intention is to replace Windows Home Server (certainly that's not my thought :) ). The linux crowd has tried that without notable success. I believe that Microsoft will at least try to continue with Vail, minus Drive Extender, so replacing DE with some other data protection/high availability mechanism that integrates well with the rest of server storage would be the preferred approach.

    As for the line of business apps you mention putting on Windows Home Server: no. They're a big part of why Drive Extender was removed in the first place. If you want a server that will run line of business apps, Aurora is that way (points vaguely toward Redmond, WA). Simple requirements for a simple consumer oriented solution, please.


     I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)


    Art Folden
    Monday, November 29, 2010 10:16 PM
  • "DE wasn't perfect, but it fit the problem perfectly.  "

    Typical MS developers solution... if it is too difficult or complicated (for them) to fix it or make it work right, then remove it. That whole damn WHS team should be fired IMO. Instead of making needed improvements to what is a pretty good server (WHSv1), they try to re-vamp the whole darn thing to suit small business and home users with a million pirated movies instead of catering to what the whole WHS project was supposed to serve, the common home users with more than one computer (most home users now I think).

    Art (artfudd) Folden
    ------------------------------
    "Kurt Sparkman" wrote in message news:2f1000b2-5c05-4272-bdd3-2a65abdde024@communitybridge.codeplex.com...

    Proteus7 - Your logic is lacking though.  How many "whiners" where there when we all had 20mb hard drives who thought we'd never need any more.  Or when we hit the GB barrier.  Something will come along with huge files, and TB drives will be like GB ones used to be.

    DE wasn't perfect, but it fit the problem perfectly.  So call us whiners all you want, but MS screwed the pooch on this one.  I'll keep my V1 server until there is another all-in-one solution available to take it's place. I'm not an MVP, I don't work in the MS administration world.  I'm a CS guy doing other things now and I have no desire to learn how to set up raid or linux or greyhole (whatever that is).  I want something I can turn on and have it work.  And since the V1 beta, it has (I didn't use any of the things that corrupted the original DE implementation).

    So swing your leg off your high horse and use that influence they give you when you become MVP's and get DE put back in, or you won't have anything to be an MVP for.  We'll stop buying WHS, we'll stop recommending it, and we'll actively lobby against our friends and family buying it.

    Kurt Sparkman


    Sparky


    Art Folden
    Monday, November 29, 2010 10:26 PM
  • "Couldn't they have offered a "basic" Vail, with well basic WHS backup functionality, and then a "Premium" version with DE. The DE technology is already proven for home use so why bother with server side stuff."

    If there were to be two versions then I think you got it backwards. The 'basic' WHS for the common home user should have DE, and the "Premium' version for the enthusiast with a zillion movies or whatever, and the small business user should NOT have DE if that (catering to those) is the reasoning for removing it as has been said.

    Art (artfudd) Folden
    ------------------------------
    "dear chap" wrote in message news:58488b96-8c8f-46a5-a8e2-0179b305ed29@communitybridge.codeplex.com...

    Proteus7 - Your logic is lacking though.  How many "whiners" where there when we all had 20mb hard drives who thought we'd never need any more.  Or when we hit the GB barrier.  Something will come along with huge files, and TB drives will be like GB ones used to be.

    DE wasn't perfect, but it fit the problem perfectly.  So call us whiners all you want, but MS screwed the pooch on this one.  I'll keep my V1 server until there is another all-in-one solution available to take it's place.  I'm not an MVP, I don't work in the MS administration world.  I'm a CS guy doing other things now and I have no desire to learn how to set up raid or linux or greyhole (whatever that is).  I want something I can turn on and have it work.  And since the V1 beta, it has (I didn't use any of the things that corrupted the original DE implementation).

    So swing your leg off your high horse and use that influence they give you when you become MVP's and get DE put back in, or you won't have anything to be an MVP for.  We'll stop buying WHS, we'll stop recommending it, and we'll actively lobby against our friends and family buying it.

    Kurt Sparkman


    Sparky

    Sparky I agree with you perfectly. I built my WHS almost 2 yrs back with a combination of PATA & SATA drives for < $400. So far it has worked perfectly and I intend to keep it as far as it can go. I looked at the Drobo FS just now to compare it to my WHS build and wasnt too impressed. Agree it has "BeyondRAID" which is basically DE. Unless I am missing something it is mainly a file share device and cannot be used for image based backups. And that solution is selling for $699. I used to recommend WHS to my colleagues and they were impressed with all the remote login capabitlites etc. So it has been a disappointment when I learned that DE is being taken out. I just dont get it. Couldnt they have offered a "basic" Vail, with well basic WHS backup functionality, and then a "Premium" version with DE. The DE technology is already proven for home use so why bother with server side stuff.
     -- Anything that doesnt have a self limiting factor is of the devil.


    Art Folden
    Monday, November 29, 2010 10:32 PM
  • "..something Joe Average can install and use easily. Never forget: you and I are*not* the target market for a consumer product."

    ....and.. 'now' it seems that 'Joe Average' is also not the target market for WHS (vail), which leaves me out.

    Art (artfudd) Folden
    ------------------------------
    "Ken Warren [MVP]" wrote in message news:7e25195b-8f98-483c-bf2c-af4821cae855@communitybridge.codeplex.com...

    Personally, I think FlexRaid is likely to be perfectly adequate, with an appropriate wrapper to configure it on installation and integrate it with the Dashboard. I haven't looked into Liquesce, but suspect it's going to be harder to take from a "techie toy" to something Joe Average can install and use easily. Never forget: you and I are*not* the target market for a consumer product.


    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)


    Art Folden
    Monday, November 29, 2010 11:00 PM
  • You're both wrong . . . real consumers build their own system with leftover
    parts and a few new ones. :)
     
    I don't ever buy what I can build from spare parts.
     
    Nancy Ward
    Windows 8 Beta Ferret
     
     

    Nancy Ward
    Tuesday, November 30, 2010 3:02 AM
  • <I would just like to say that if Drive Extender is is being deprecated it
    is because the team believes they can do a better job placing the same
    resources on building the same simplicity based on RAID technology.>
     
    Dream on, Jeff. Dream on . . . :)
     
    Nancy Ward
    Windows 8 Beta Ferret
     
     

    Nancy Ward
    Tuesday, November 30, 2010 4:26 AM
  • <RAID. Modern RAID controllers are fast, reliable, can be easy to setup and
    work pretty well. Heck, even firmware, or OS software RAID works well. OEMs
    can (and have) written wizards to make RAID controller setup a snap.>
     
    And what do those of us who can't afford to go out and purchase this extra
    stuff do? This is a HOME server; not a BUSINESS server!
     
    You may not hesitate to throw away perfectly good hard drives (which is just
    plain silly), but I don't throw anything that can be repurposed away!
     
    Nancy Ward
    Windows 8 Beta Ferret
     
     

    Nancy Ward
    Tuesday, November 30, 2010 4:47 AM
  • Nancy,

    RAID is cheap. $125 will buy you a Promise Fastrack SATA RAID controller at Sears or Walmart (even cheaper at Newegg). Heck, RAID is included in most intel chipsets these days! Yes, its firmware RAID, but its certainly as reliable as the software RAID0 found in DEv2!

    2TB HDDs were on sale for $70 at Frys the other day. There's really no excuse to use old junk. While we geeks certainly repurpose things, most consumers throw it away when it breaks, and then buy a new HP, or whatever home server from an OEM. I'm sure HP will pop a low end raid controller in their upcoming Vail servers, and problem solved.

    Tuesday, November 30, 2010 9:20 PM
  • Apart from the Raid being a good alternative or not..$ 125 is not jus a few dimes..(my translation of cheap) $ 125 is more than the WHS software alone.  And it's as an example... way more expensive than a Motherboard + 4 GB memory for WHS.
    Cheap is not the same as "I'm willing to spend money on it" Meaning *in your opinion $125 is cheap*, but certainly not in mine.
    This all a part from complexibility and 2 identical disks etc..
     
     
    > There's really no excuse to use old junk.
    Yes there is (since I dont have'a tree that is growing money on an ongoing base).
    Raid controller 125
    2 TB HD ( 2*70=140)
     
    So just for raid (starter kit as I call it ) you need $ 265.. yeah cheap my a..
     
     

    Nancy,

    RAID is cheap. $125 will buy you a Promise Fastrack SATA RAID controller at Sears or Walmart (even cheaper at Newegg). Heck, RAID is included in most intel chipsets these days! Yes, its firmware RAID, but its certainly as reliable as the software RAID0 found in DEv2!

    2TB HDDs were on sale for $70 at Frys the other day. There's really no excuse to use old junk. While we geeks certainly repurpose things, most consumers throw it away when it breaks, and then buy a new HP, or whatever home server from an OEM. I'm sure HP will pop a low end raid controller in their upcoming Vail servers, and problem solved.


    Have a nice day!
    Tuesday, November 30, 2010 9:34 PM
  • <RAID is cheap. $125 will buy you a Promise Fastrack SATA RAID controller
    at Sears or Walmart (even cheaper at Newegg). Heck, RAID is included in most
    intel chipsets these days! Yes, its firmware RAID, but its certainly as
    reliable as the software RAID0 found in DEv2!
     
    2TB HDDs were on sale for $70 at Frys the other day. There's really no
    excuse to use old junk. While we geeks certainly repurpose things, most
    consumers throw it away when it breaks, and then buy a new HP, or whatever
    home server from an OEM. I'm sure HP will pop a low end raid controller in
    their upcoming Vail servers, and problem solved.>
     
    By my calculations, that's $195. Certainly not cheap when you calculate in
    fixed income. I may be a geek, but my income earning days came to an end
    some 11 years ago, so $195 is a large sum of non-disposable income for me.
    And, I'm not the only one in this boat either!
     
    Doesn't matter to me what HP pops for, I won't have the disposable income
    for it. I'll continue to use my leftover junk.
     
    Nancy Ward
    Windows 8 Beta Ferret
     
     

    Nancy Ward
    Tuesday, November 30, 2010 10:29 PM
  • > By my calculations, that's $195.
     
    For Raid you need at least two HD's.. So, another 70.. ;-)
    <RAID is cheap. $125 will buy you a Promise Fastrack SATA RAID controller
    at Sears or Walmart (even cheaper at Newegg). Heck, RAID is included in most
    intel chipsets these days! Yes, its firmware RAID, but its certainly as
    reliable as the software RAID0 found in DEv2!
     
    2TB HDDs were on sale for $70 at Frys the other day. There's really no
    excuse to use old junk. While we geeks certainly repurpose things, most
    consumers throw it away when it breaks, and then buy a new HP, or whatever
    home server from an OEM. I'm sure HP will pop a low end raid controller in
    their upcoming Vail servers, and problem solved.>
     
    By my calculations, that's $195. Certainly not cheap when you calculate in
    fixed income. I may be a geek, but my income earning days came to an end
    some 11 years ago, so $195 is a large sum of non-disposable income for me.
    And, I'm not the only one in this boat either!
     
    Doesn't matter to me what HP pops for, I won't have the disposable income
    for it. I'll continue to use my leftover junk.
     
    Nancy Ward
    Windows 8 Beta Ferret
     
     

    Nancy Ward

    Have a nice day!
    Tuesday, November 30, 2010 10:51 PM
  • some of you are so fascinated by RAID. yuck. RAID is simply overcomplicated and too focused on performance. There is a while when we thought parallel connections to attached devices and harddrives were a good idea. But then serial connections were made much faster and the extra complexity brought by a parallel data connection is not worth it. I'm not sure this is the best analogy in the world, but its all I'm good for at the moment.

    Quite simply we all like DE because, for this usage, we don't need what RAID brings us, so the extra complexity is entirely unwelcome. In addition RAID has a lot of limitations that get in the way of home use. So why require it? There is a reason why DE was invented, rather than a RAID solution being employed. Some of you think of it as a kludge, but I think it was really elegant. And I think its that elegance and simplicity of concept that has brought most of us to the table here. We are NOT looking for additional complexity to be introduced.

    Now there may be some good software RAID solutions that are simple enough to use and eliminate some of the shortcomings of hardware RAID, and I would like to hear about them in case the PMs of WHS continue in this monumentally bad move. But I would guess none of these solutions are as polished and reliable as even v1 DE. And I KNOW they can't be as easy to use or as easy to minister to when sick, or I would have heard about them already, but enlighten me, if this is not the case.

    Tuesday, November 30, 2010 11:02 PM
  • I'm not sure if Microsoft really knew what it wanted. A home user product that competes with NAS and OpenSource Server solutions and hope that it will be a success. But WHS is a niche product and certainly not a resounding economic success.
    Or a precursor to a new modern and universal operating system. This is obviously to now twice failed. DE is not reliable and was never reliable. And who says otherwise, dreams (or even worse).

    The bad thing is not the game box of some home users is now broken, but the vision of an operating system with a modern, robust, efficient and high-performance storage system appears damaged. I was expecting from Microsoft a kind of "last word" in terms of storage system, which eliminates hardware RAID and is a response to ZFS. I'm not a fan of hardware RAID, but in the present circumstances, no other choice if you want to build a serious home server on Windows.

    Tuesday, November 30, 2010 11:41 PM
  • <some of you are so fascinated by RAID. yuck. RAID is simply
    overcomplicated and too focused on performance.>
     
    I hope your reply wasn't meant for Leen or me, since we both seem to prefer
    DE over RAID. Not only is RAID cost prohibitive for me, but it's not
    something your average HOME user will wish to delve into. After all,
    WHS/Vail was originally for the HOME user, not the BUSINESS user.
     
    Nancy Ward
    Windows 8 Beta Ferret
     
     

    Nancy Ward
    Tuesday, November 30, 2010 11:43 PM
  • Art, most likely FlexRaid can be wrapped in an add-in, with wizards to handle the actual grunt work of configuration for you. It still won't be as flexible as Drive Extender, unfortunately.
    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)
    Wednesday, December 1, 2010 1:26 AM
    Moderator
  • the whole purpose to DE was to simplify the setup/configuration/mgmt/deployment of the disk pooling, that is truly the benefit to WHSv1.  We've been able to do pooling, shares, etc for years using lots of handy tricks/tweaks/scripts/scsi/etc.   By pushing off to greyhole, we are back where we started, at least until its out of beta and working and can be used like DE with a simple click here and there.  Will Greyhole offer that type of ease of use??   I havent installed or looked at it other than a few comments and the google page you linked.

    M$ is really not getting what we all do with this and that we support hundreds of others who have it that we encouraged to use it at home for the ease of use.

    Thursday, December 9, 2010 4:26 PM
  • He is referring to an addin for V2, that is what it would sit on.
    Thursday, December 9, 2010 4:28 PM
  • I think it’s hard to say what sort of add-in would solve our WHS woes.  I suppose since Microsoft is pushing for traditional RAID-based storage protection, what we could use is a management utility for RAID/Software RAID.  Most raid manufactures produce a windows utility to mange the raid hardware and it should not be too hard to make a simplified version of it.  At the end of the day we need two 'storage pools':  Protected and Unprotected.  RAID would suit the protected storage and unprotected storage would be for our mix/match drives; when we wish to protect a share, it would simply be moved to the RAID drives.  This is obviously not as elegant as DE but it would be our only real option at this point.

    Tuesday, December 14, 2010 10:21 PM
  • I just wanted to add my two cents and Vote to the DE discussion.  WHS is primarily a home-based back-up system for me the I am trusting it to take care of me when bad things happen.  I have had to use it to recover a corrupted Windows Mail store on my wife's machine and its vigilant backup process was there when I needed it.  To me the brilliance of the WHS product is all wrapped up in DE.  Set and forget virtual drive store that intelligently backs up file changes without mutiple copies of duplicate files.  Automatic protection from drive failure - which is mostly why we use backup's to begin with.  The rest of the functionality is gravy.  Take away the core, and you have taken away the reason for its existence, at least for me.  I hope they reconsider, or as an alternative, just get rid of "Vail" and keep enhancing and supporting WHS V1.

    Thursday, December 16, 2010 6:24 PM
  • I'm also serious considering not to upgrade to Vail. What would I be missing by not upgrading ?
    Thursday, December 16, 2010 8:39 PM
  • Even with DE, Vail failed to be much interesting in the first place (probably said that long ago here).
    And now without DE.... but I'll be looking forward to how MS will surprise us in January..
    I'm also serious considering not to upgrade to Vail. What would I be missing by not upgrading ?

    Have a nice day!
    Thursday, December 16, 2010 9:21 PM
  • "...looking forward to how MS will surprise us in January."

    To me it will be no surprise if there is no surprise!  :)

    Art (artfudd) Folden
    ------------------------------
    "Leen [MVP]" wrote in message news:981ddda3-cc9c-43f4-baa6-741155bbd500@communitybridge.codeplex.com...
     Even with DE, Vail failed to be much interesting in the first place (probably said that long ago here).
    And now without DE.... but I'll be looking forward to how MS will surprise us in January..

    "Jeong Ho Lee" schreef in bericht news:e4afddee-9771-4f5b-9a50-b00779d716b7@communitybridge.codeplex.com...I'm also serious considering not to upgrade to Vail. What would I be missing by not upgrading ?

    -- Have a nice day!


    Art Folden
    Thursday, December 16, 2010 10:47 PM
  • I just wanted to add my two cents and Vote to the DE discussion.  WHS is primarily a home-based back-up system for me the I am trusting it to take care of me when bad things happen.  I have had to use it to recover a corrupted Windows Mail store on my wife's machine and its vigilant backup process was there when I needed it.  To me the brilliance of the WHS product is all wrapped up in DE.  Set and forget virtual drive store that intelligently backs up file changes without mutiple copies of duplicate files.  Automatic protection from drive failure - which is mostly why we use backup's to begin with.  The rest of the functionality is gravy.  Take away the core, and you have taken away the reason for its existence, at least for me.  I hope they reconsider, or as an alternative, just get rid of "Vail" and keep enhancing and supporting WHS V1.


    WHS is no backup system and never was a backup system.
    Unfortunately Microsoft has offered WHS as a "backup" device. But a backup requires an offline copy of the data. 
    WHS instead is a server that is only dealing with the availability of data.
    And both striping and mirroring ensures the availability of data.

    Friday, December 17, 2010 2:25 AM
  • WHS is no backup system and never was a backup system.
    Unfortunately Microsoft has offered WHS as a "backup" device. But a backup requires an offline copy of the data. 
    WHS instead is a server that is only dealing with the availability of data.
    And both striping and mirroring ensures the availability of data.
    You pretty obviously don't know much about Windows Home Server. It does an automatic nightly backup of your client computers, and allows for bare metal restore if, for example, one of thaem has a hard drive failure. Even by your definition, the backups of the client computers are offline as far as the client computers are concerned.
    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)
    Friday, December 17, 2010 2:34 AM
    Moderator
  • As some others have stated, this might be a good idea if it's not vail specific, to target an OS which currently has so many running from it is probably not a great idea. The idea of running it on Win7/Vail.Aurora/w2K8SVR etc is a much more appealing solution to me, but then again as a user stated, you could very much wind up in a nightmare if MS updates something that breaks the add-in, 1 thing like that and people lose data and the add-in is toast.

    1 of 2 things need to happen here, either MS puts DE back into vail or they need to kill off WHS all together so people will just move on and better solutions to WHS could be found.

    Tuesday, January 4, 2011 1:19 AM