Sign in
Microsoft.com
 
Microsoft
 
 
 

locked
WHS RC1 on a bit smaller harddrive RRS feed

 > 

  • Question

  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote

    G'day

     

    Before I start I just want to say that I'm just buggering around with WHS for the moment just to see how it

    works ect, thus the reason I'm only using small hardrives ect.

     

    After reading through a few posts I noticed that you need a minimum 65GB~ harddrive to install the

    RC1 (MS say 80GB) on but currently I only have an old IBM 61.4 GB hardrive Tongue Tied .

     

    So I'm just wondering if there is some way I can install it with resized partitons?

    or if I can plug in another 20GB harddrive in and it can use both?

     

    And just gotta say that this software is great! love it!  Good job!

     

    Thanks

    Simon

     

     

    Sunday, June 24, 2007 3:15 PM

Answers

  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote
    No, because of the way drive extender manages your files and drives, the 65 GB minimum is pretty much a hard limit. You don't have the ability to change the size of the partitions created during installation, so you can't squeeze a little more out that way.
    Sunday, June 24, 2007 6:07 PM
    Moderator

All replies

  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote
    No, because of the way drive extender manages your files and drives, the 65 GB minimum is pretty much a hard limit. You don't have the ability to change the size of the partitions created during installation, so you can't squeeze a little more out that way.
    Sunday, June 24, 2007 6:07 PM
    Moderator
  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote
    What about  2 40 gig harddrives. Instead of one 65 gig,
    Monday, June 25, 2007 4:40 AM
  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote
    I recently tried that, but with a 40gb and a 320gb, WHS would not install because the primary drive wasnt large enough, so unless the drive is in a raid then probably not.
    Monday, June 25, 2007 1:46 PM
  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote
    If you can find a cheap Win2003 bootable RAID controller, you could bind the 2x40gb into one RAID-0 80gb.
    Wednesday, June 27, 2007 12:01 AM
  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote

     Ken Warren wrote:
    No, because of the way drive extender manages your files and drives, the 65 GB minimum is pretty much a hard limit. You don't have the ability to change the size of the partitions created during installation, so you can't squeeze a little more out that way.

     

    Just wondering... would it be better to have a small say 100 GB drive as the system drive instead of using a 320 GB drive? I currently have 3 320GB drives installed in my system now, and from what I keep reading it might be an advantage to have a small system drive instead of one of the large drives in case of system drive crashes.

     

    Thanks for your comments.

     

    gib

    Wednesday, June 27, 2007 3:39 AM
  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote
    Gib, the primary data partition (D:, the second partition on the system drive) is used for a number of things. With only one drive in the WHS, everything is stored there. With a second drive, share duplication goes there, along with tombstones (pointers, really) to where the files actually are. (Backups may also be on this drive with only two drives.) With a third drive, the only thing left behind, as long as there's room for files on the other drives, is the tombstones and a little bit of system data. That's the static use for the D: drive.

    The dynamic use is as a landing zone for files being copied/moved to WHS. Drive Extender (the storage manager) will eventually move the files off of D:, but it may take some time, and as long as the files are there, they are taking up space. Client PCs only see the free space on D:, so while those files are there, your available space for copies is reduced.

    That's why a large drive is strongly recommended as the system drive.
    Wednesday, June 27, 2007 4:00 AM
    Moderator
  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote

     Ken Warren wrote:
    Gib, the primary data partition (D:, the second partition on the system drive) is used for a number of things. With only one drive in the WHS, everything is stored there. With a second drive, share duplication goes there, along with tombstones (pointers, really) to where the files actually are. (Backups may also be on this drive with only two drives.) With a third drive, the only thing left behind, as long as there's room for files on the other drives, is the tombstones and a little bit of system data. That's the static use for the D: drive.

    The dynamic use is as a landing zone for files being copied/moved to WHS. Drive Extender (the storage manager) will eventually move the files off of D:, but it may take some time, and as long as the files are there, they are taking up space. Client PCs only see the free space on D:, so while those files are there, your available space for copies is reduced.

    That's why a large drive is strongly recommended as the system drive.

     

    Thanks Ken.

     

    Just what I needed to know. As one other person mentioned in a post somewhere there is so much differing information flying around in the forums that it's hard to tell exactly what the system is doing and how a WHS server should be provisioned. Now I know it's good to have an adequately sized primary drive for best performance.

     

    gib

    Wednesday, June 27, 2007 4:11 AM