none
Does primary drive really need to be largest drive? RRS feed

  • Question

  •  

    I am about to set up a WHS box. I have been doing a lot of reading, and there is a lot of recommendations, out there to put the system/primary partitions on a drive, equal  to or greater than the largest secondary drive.  Seems to make sense, if all of the drives are relatively small.

     

    I'm wondering if that's really necessary, if the smallest disk is fairly large to begin with.  I am thinking of using my 320gig drive as the system/primary partitions, with two 750gig drives as secondaries.  I can't ever imagine >300G landing on the primary at one time, to ever be a bottleneck. Not even a 3 hour HD video file should make a dent on the primary drive, before it tries to move it to a secondary drive.

     

    Am I missing something here?

     

    Thanks

    Friday, March 21, 2008 7:53 PM

Answers

  •  

    Looks like you have been researching correctly.  You really just need the primary drive big enough to handle large file transfers.  I would recommend making the primary drive faster rather then extremely large.  320GB's is should be more than enough.
    Friday, March 21, 2008 10:23 PM
    Moderator
  • Hi,

    Your Raptor can't be used as the system drive, WHS will not install on a disk smaller than 80GB. Also, if you could use it, you will be unable to transfer any large files as these files need to land on the initial disk, prior to being moved to it's storage place.

    Some time ago, during the beta stage, there was a discussion regarding just this, and the consensus then, was that a disk of 320GB-or more, was the minimum, going on size to price.

    This document has the technical details, which is worth reading.

     

    HTH,

     

    Colin

     

    Sunday, March 23, 2008 9:23 PM
  • I just wanted to add to this for future forum users but if you had only 2 drives, then it would be more important your primary drive was larger by at least 20GBs than your secondary drive.  The reason is because when duplication is enabled, it will try and duplicate all data to both your D: and the second drive. 

     

    Basically, if your primary drive was 320GBs and your second drive was 750GBs, you would be limited with duplication to 300GBs (20 GBs is being used for the operating system).  If the primary drive has less than 5 GBs of space (d: ) it will give a Red Network Health Notification.

     

    With more drives, you are less likely to run into this situation because Drive Extender can duplicate onto the other drives keeping data off of D:.

    Tuesday, March 25, 2008 10:25 PM
    Moderator

All replies

  •  

    Looks like you have been researching correctly.  You really just need the primary drive big enough to handle large file transfers.  I would recommend making the primary drive faster rather then extremely large.  320GB's is should be more than enough.
    Friday, March 21, 2008 10:23 PM
    Moderator
  • Thanks for the information. I have some questions on the same theme

     

    (1) Is there anyway of estimating the required size of the primary drive?

     

    (2) Currently I have installed two 500 GB Western Digital RE hard disks. I was considering using my 74 GB Western Digital Raptor (which I assume is faster since it runs with 10000 rpm ) as the primary drive, but I decided not to use it after reading somewhere that the primary drive should be as large as possible. That is, would 3 hard disks (1*74 GB + 2*500 GB) been a better setup?   

    Sunday, March 23, 2008 6:16 PM
  • Hi,

    Your Raptor can't be used as the system drive, WHS will not install on a disk smaller than 80GB. Also, if you could use it, you will be unable to transfer any large files as these files need to land on the initial disk, prior to being moved to it's storage place.

    Some time ago, during the beta stage, there was a discussion regarding just this, and the consensus then, was that a disk of 320GB-or more, was the minimum, going on size to price.

    This document has the technical details, which is worth reading.

     

    HTH,

     

    Colin

     

    Sunday, March 23, 2008 9:23 PM
  • I just wanted to add to this for future forum users but if you had only 2 drives, then it would be more important your primary drive was larger by at least 20GBs than your secondary drive.  The reason is because when duplication is enabled, it will try and duplicate all data to both your D: and the second drive. 

     

    Basically, if your primary drive was 320GBs and your second drive was 750GBs, you would be limited with duplication to 300GBs (20 GBs is being used for the operating system).  If the primary drive has less than 5 GBs of space (d: ) it will give a Red Network Health Notification.

     

    With more drives, you are less likely to run into this situation because Drive Extender can duplicate onto the other drives keeping data off of D:.

    Tuesday, March 25, 2008 10:25 PM
    Moderator
  • Thank you all, for confirming my assumptions.

     

    This is was what it sounded like.  That if I had at least 3 drives, data would be kept off the primary drive, and that it's primary purpose would be system, tombstones, and a holding station for Drive Extender. 

     

    With the primary intent of my WHS box being backup and media server, I can imagine filling 1.5TB worth of shows, but not 300GB worth of tombstones.

     

    Thanks, again.

    Tuesday, April 1, 2008 1:25 PM