Sign in
Microsoft.com
 
Microsoft
 
 
 

locked
Sys Drive too small RRS feed

 > 

  • Question

  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote
    On my third install of WHS after a HD failure of two 500GB drives one of which was the Sys and Data drive.

    The second install was on a 620GB drive and went well until I started adding programs (addons) I noticed that the SYS Drive was only given 20GB and I started getting low disk space notices and then it refused to even install any more programs saying not enough disk space. 

    I also was able to recover * most * of my data and copied it back over to the Data partition ( obviously in the wrong place) and was hit with all kinds of File Conflict errors.

    I have yanked out the 620GB Drive and did a fresh install on a 250GB and it too only made the SYS drive 20GB!!!

    Before I start the restoration again I want to make that SYS drive bigger - How can this be done?

    Ultimately I want to either use the 620GB as my main drive or add it to the pool after getting my stuff off of it.

    Ideas ? Suggestions ? HELP please .. I await a reply before going further but can not keep server offline for long... Thanks in advance.

    Doug / DMC2U
    Wednesday, April 29, 2009 2:08 PM

Answers

  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote
    There's no easy way to increase size of the C partition, and even though it can be done I would advise you not to do this since it's not supported.

    Normally installing Add-in's should not occupy enormous amounts of space on the C partition. Possibly there are some logfiles or tempfiles that fill up your C partition. What you can do is monitor the free space on the C partition after you have reinstalled your server. If you observe abnormal decrease of free space you should try and find out what's causing this. EDIT: You can use a utility like Treesize or JdiskReport to find out which folders are taking up most space.

    If you still think you need a larger C partition please read these instructions
    Wednesday, April 29, 2009 2:34 PM
    Moderator

All replies

  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote
    There's no easy way to increase size of the C partition, and even though it can be done I would advise you not to do this since it's not supported.

    Normally installing Add-in's should not occupy enormous amounts of space on the C partition. Possibly there are some logfiles or tempfiles that fill up your C partition. What you can do is monitor the free space on the C partition after you have reinstalled your server. If you observe abnormal decrease of free space you should try and find out what's causing this. EDIT: You can use a utility like Treesize or JdiskReport to find out which folders are taking up most space.

    If you still think you need a larger C partition please read these instructions
    Wednesday, April 29, 2009 2:34 PM
    Moderator
  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote
    Question: why do you need the system partition to be larger than 20 GB? What Windows Home Server add-ons are consuming so much space on C:? Remember that Windows Home Server is not designed to be used as a desktop, or as a general purpose (multi-purpose) server. "I need to install a lot of software" is an indication to me that you should look at your requirements and determine if all of the things you want to install are appropriate on a server that, by design, you will never log in to directly, and that is intended to be a "set it and forget it" node on your home network rather than a computer you use interactively every day.

    That said, resizing the system drive is unsupported and not recommended. Brubber has linked to one set of instructions; there are other ways to achieve the same result. It's possible (though I think unlikely) that a future update to Windows Home Server would rely on the system partition being 20 GB, which would preclude updates to your server past that point. More likely is a system drive failure; if you have resized the system partition, presumably you have a great deal of software and customization that you've done "outside the box" and you will have to re-implement all of those chages on a new system drive.
    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)
    Wednesday, April 29, 2009 3:42 PM
    Moderator
  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    1
    Sign in to vote

    Mounting a drive maps a folder to a partition lying on another drive.  You could try this for your folder program files and others used in application installation.  Im not sure if it would reck windows home server or if its supported.  I would guess you would add another drive and not include it in the drive extender pool and just format it ntfs.  Use disk management and set a folder to mount to the other physical drive and partition.  Someone please correct me if im wrong I have not tried this myself.

    • Marked as answer by DMC2U Friday, May 22, 2009 10:43 AM
    • Unmarked as answer by DMC2U Friday, May 22, 2009 10:43 AM
    Tuesday, May 19, 2009 6:40 PM
  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote
    Thank You all for your replies.

    "Im not sure if it would reck windows home server or if its supported."  "Someone please correct me if im wrong I have not tried this myself."

    Jaywolff - you go first... <veg>


    I have solved this problem once again by reinstalling on a 80GB Drive and then Ghosting onto a 250GB drive which increased the SYS Drive size. I then added a 640GB drive for more storage. I will be Ghosting the current 250GB onto a 640GB if and when the need arises for more storage.

    http://dmcenterprises.homeserver.com/dmcenterprises/images/storage.png


    "Remember that Windows Home Server is not designed to be used as a desktop, or as a general purpose (multi-purpose) server."

    Praise the lord others don't stay " inside the box" and make addins that allow an OS to do what it was not designed to do! (YAY Whiist)

    They should have named it Windows Home Backup or Windows Home Pictures if it was not going to act as a general purpose (multi-purpose) server.
    Friday, May 22, 2009 11:30 AM
  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote
    So be it, but don't act surprised if things blow up and the server no longer works as expected.
    Saturday, May 23, 2009 5:24 AM
  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    1
    Sign in to vote
    Here's a pretty good reason to have a larger SYS partition: the Windows Search service places its database on the C drive.  If you have a lot of data (I, for example, have 9 1.5TB drives connected to my WHS, and plan to add a lot more), the search database easily overruns a 20GB partition.  If you try to move it to D drive, WHS complains in its log that the file is not expected to be there everytime it tries to rebalance.

    Another reason is for the pagefile (and/or hibernation file; and don't get on about how "it's a server and should always be powered on"; LightsOut is popular for a reason).  If you have a lot of RAM, the pagefile and hiberfil want/need to be the same size as RAM.  WHS complains in its logfiles if you put the pagefile on the D drive, and you can't put the hiberfil on another drive.

    The same is true of some multimedia serving software.  They can sometimes require that your data is stored in your profile, and it's really messy to move Documents and Settings.  And I have a LOT of multimedia files.

    MS should really allow an advanced user to change the SYS partition size at install time.  Or at least offer a supported technique to do same.  The ability to add lots of drive space is only helpful if the primary drive is configured to be capable of supporting them.
    Monday, May 25, 2009 2:21 AM
  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote

    Open request to Microsoft guys...

    The whole 20GB limitation of the system volume is (in my opinion) unacceptable. The standard answer of "Its not designed to... blah blah) is also unacceptable and typical Microsoft. Don't even put "Server" in the name if this restriction is going to be in place - it is misleading. Give us an alternative!

    I'm not a MS basher -- on the contrary I have been using MS products since the DOS days and maintain desktops and full blown server systems at work from XP all the way to Server 2008. I'm one of the few MS supporters in a a world of Linux/Unix guys at my shop.

    Windows Home server is SO close to being the ultimate home server but it is definitly not there yet. Such a shame... There are a number of us who want a FULL Blown REAL server at home to run multiple server applications, develop code on and run SQL server on and maintian our own WSUS server for our home systems.

    I CAN understand what MS is trying to do here. The ease of backup without 3rd party software and its media sharing capabilities is the whole reason it is attactive. All I'm asking for is a path for us advanced users to maintian a real server with the good points of WHS.  Give us the advanced installation options to do it ourselves without having to hack unsupported solutions. A lot of us have high powered servers at home that could be the basis for a general purpose server for the entire house - what we want in addition to that is the console and ease of backup/restore and media sharing. Worrying about a puny 20GB system partition that fills up in a day is so unnecessary.

    I give up on Home server until if/when this is ever done. Guess I got to go install a real server OS now... and go through the pain of trying to duplicate what is already built into WHS. Sigh...

    Wednesday, June 24, 2009 3:15 PM
  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote
    Mike, to be honest, Windows Home Server is not designed to be used as Windows Server 2003 (or 2008) "lite", it's intended to provide a small set of core services in the home, to people without the technical skills to administer (or even understand the need to administer) a full-blown Windows Server installation. Exposing the full capabilities of the underlying OS is really antithetical to the core concept of simplifying the server for the non-technical user.

    So I think Windows Home Server is not the "FULL blown REAL server" you're looking for, and probably will never be that server; that's not it's target market. If you want a general-purpose server, you need to look at options such as Windows Server 2008.

    Windows Home Server does have more use than as a single-purpose server in the home, however. It will serve very well in a small business environment, for example, as a file sharing and backup tool. But again, that isn't the flexible general-purpose server you're looking for.

    Since you seem to feel strongly about this, I highly recommend that you go over to Connect and vote/verify some product suggestions that are in line with what you have in mind, or submit some if there's nothing that seems to meet your needs.

    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)
    Wednesday, June 24, 2009 4:04 PM
    Moderator
  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote

    UPDATE:

    Hey Guy's

    So far all systems are functioning within parameters... Server storage has changed and the SYS drive actually has increased on it's own See:

    http://dmcenterprises.homeserver.com/dmcenterprises/images/newstorage.png

    Ken, it is very obvious where your loyalties lie.

     

    To suggest that we “look at options such as Windows Server 2008." is ludicrous.

     

    System requirements (http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2008/en/us/system-requirements.aspx) and costs for such a thing (Server 2008) is way beyond the average "Home" user’s budget which is what makes Windows Home Server so appealing to us. 

     

    Home Server can be installed on just about any old system.

    http://apcmag.com/windows_home_server_system_requirements_and_sdk.htm

    Put back the functionality of Server 2003 that Home Server is built upon and give options to install the features that some may want beyond what WHS offers now and make it just as user friendly to install. Limit usage through the license agreement and watch it sell like Ice Cold Lemonade on a Hot Summer Day.  

     

    • Edited by DMC2U Friday, June 26, 2009 2:27 AM
    Thursday, June 25, 2009 7:04 PM
  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote
    UPDATE:

    Hey Guy's

    So far all systems are functioning within parameters... Server storage has changed and the SYS drive actually has increased on it's own See:

    http://dmcenterprises.homeserver.com/dmcenterprises/images/storage1.png

    The OS partition has not "changed".  WHS doesn't know where to put files that are outside of WHS shares so it lumps them in with SYSTEM (and that includes Shadow Copies).  Your OS partition is still 20 GB.

    Ken, it is very obvious where your loyalties lie.

    To suggest that we “look at options such as Windows Server 2008." is ludicrous.

    System requirements (http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2008/en/us/system-requirements.aspx) and costs for such a thing (Server 2008) is way beyond the average "Home" user’s budget which is what makes Windows Home Server so appealing to us.

    Agreed.  Server 2008 is expensive in relation to WHS.  You know why?  Because you are getting a full featured server OS (not one that has all sorts of restrictions).  If you want a full fledged OS, you have to pay for it.  Besides, no "home" user is ever going to install SQL, Exchange, WSUS, or any other app mentioned in this thread.  They won't even know what those are.  The bottom line is if you want to use those apps, you are not the target demographic of this product.

    Home Server can be installed on just about any old system.

    http://apcmag.com/windows_home_server_system_requirements_and_sdk.htm

    Put back the functionality of Server 2003 that Home Server is built upon and give options to install the features that some may want beyond what WHS offers now and make it just as user friendly to install. Limit usage through the license agreement and watch it sell like Ice Cold Lemonade on a Hot Summer Day.  
    Thursday, June 25, 2009 10:20 PM
    Moderator
  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote

    ...
    Ken, it is very obvious where your loyalties lie.

    ...

    Nah. I don't work for Microsoft, I'm not paid by Microsoft, and I don't sell or otherwise profit from Microsoft products.

    I like the Windows Home Server as is: a simple, easy-to-use (for the non-technical user, who is the primary target demographic) device that solves certain problems that home users have a great deal of trouble solving on their own. So much trouble, in fact, that most of them never solve them. I think it needs work; the media handling is, umm, not what it could be (that's me, ever the master of understatement :) ) for example. 

    But adding and supporting (through the Windows Home Server partners like HP, Acer, etc.) significant additional complexity to support the very small number of people who could actually get a benifit from it (that small number includes me)? Not in a million years would I recommend that to anyone. I wouldn't recommend Microsoft add it to Windows Home Server, and if they did, I'd drop Windows Home Server (and my MVP status) like a hot potato.

    What I'm saying is that if you want a full-featured server OS, you should invest in one. You can buy it (Windows Small Business Server 2008, Windows Server 2008), or roll your own, e.g. Amahi on Ubuntu. But don't expect anyone to sell and support the capabilities of Windows Server 2008 for the price of Windows Home Server.

    I'm not on the WHS team, I just post a lot. :)
    Friday, June 26, 2009 4:23 PM
    Moderator