Sign in
Microsoft.com
 
Microsoft
 
 
 

locked
different storage: dont waste hdd-capacity from other running systems RRS feed

 > 

  • Question

  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote

    Hello,

     

    following situation right now. Storage for home server could be

    1. Internal IDE
    2. Internal SATA
    3. External USB2 
    4. External eSATA
    5. External Firewire

    The both eSATA and Firewire should be supported from the manufacturer (e.g. HP). At this point I dont see this with the preinfos of HP

     

    What are we missing?

     

    Yes.. a new agent to use addition HDD-Space from other systems in a network. The Home Server should get a special agent to discover unused HDD-Space from special dedicated system (e.g. my old Compaq Deskpro SFF, each with a HDD from 250-320GB) using Windows 2000 Professional.) Please do not use only XP or Vista… don’t forget the users who are working with w2k too.

    Right now I do not have any alternative to use this available space because of

    • no place for a second hdd in my home server
    • not willing to buy a slow USB external box with yet another transformer (old systems normally support USB1.1 only),

    I like the idea really splitting the volumes over different separated systems due to security reasons. If I have some hdd in one system and this system will get hit there might be a complete loss off all hdd too.

     

    If you think that this idea of an "agenat" will improve MSHS lplease vote. Link to vote at Connect

     

    Friday, April 13, 2007 9:36 AM

Answers

  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote
    Support for different drive types is determined by the hardware. So you need to have a Firewire or eSATA port, and an appropriate driver. At that point WHS will support the drive.

    As for remote storage for WHS, any PC supplying that remote storage will need to be on 24x7, just like WHS itself. Otherwise, when you turn off a particular PC, the files on that PC suddenly become unavailable to WHS. Consider also the performance impact. A slow USB2 drive will still offer several times the performance of the usual home network (100 mb).
    Friday, April 13, 2007 11:32 AM
    Moderator
  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote

    Thomas,

     

    I think that you're asking for a major change in the WHS product.  The WHS file system would go from using a set of local drives to a distributed file system running on multiple operating systems, so of which are being retired.  It would take a lot more than an "agent" to make this work.  The simple storage management features of WHS would become more complex with many more failure modes.

     

    And the benefit?  Using old drives and computers until they fail?  This is not a good strategy for reliability!

     

    I understand and appreciate your motives, but I doubt that the product would ever move in this direction.

     

    Murray

    Friday, April 13, 2007 3:44 PM

All replies

  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote
    Support for different drive types is determined by the hardware. So you need to have a Firewire or eSATA port, and an appropriate driver. At that point WHS will support the drive.

    As for remote storage for WHS, any PC supplying that remote storage will need to be on 24x7, just like WHS itself. Otherwise, when you turn off a particular PC, the files on that PC suddenly become unavailable to WHS. Consider also the performance impact. A slow USB2 drive will still offer several times the performance of the usual home network (100 mb).
    Friday, April 13, 2007 11:32 AM
    Moderator
  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote

    Hello Ken,

    thanks for your reply.

     

    Yes, I do know that the ability to use remote storage goes in conjunction with another 24/7 system. This is not the problem. Right now there are serveral system on 24/7 duty to do replication jobs (archiving & versioning thru suresync).

     

    All system do have a transformer and all system are using large IDE hdd's. If I need to buy a good USB2 external box with a good cooling these boxes also must have a transformer but would be plugged to the MSHS directly. So in fact I think the energy-savings would not justify the needed purchase just for the duplicating-necessity to add drives to MSHS. On the other hand, working with my "old & stable" Compaq Deskpro SFF P3/933, I have the chance to do some more other jobs parallel to serve the MSHS e.g. working on BOINC projects. Special I am a fan of different systems, If one hdd blows up the other systems are truly not effected because of seperate system design.

     

    I think the bandwith just for serving hdd-space is not a problem. Even if the connection with USB2 is faster than CAT-7 with a good ethernet  switch, what for do you need this kind of speed (e.g. maintenance?) Why there is the recommandation not to use USB1.1?

     

    Why to have an agent which will work with XP,Vista and W2K?

    • Special for a good, easy and silent migration from different single-systems via peer-to-peer to the new MSHS as "the" outstanding center of homeservice
    • Special for a goot migration to let old IDE hdd work till end of lifetime (would you buy a IDE today? or would you select a SATA, special in terms of the problem finding a very good external box for IDE drives.
    • Just to give a user the chance to "use up" the old equipment, not to force the user for additional consume.

     

    Friday, April 13, 2007 12:47 PM
  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote

    Thomas,

     

    I think that you're asking for a major change in the WHS product.  The WHS file system would go from using a set of local drives to a distributed file system running on multiple operating systems, so of which are being retired.  It would take a lot more than an "agent" to make this work.  The simple storage management features of WHS would become more complex with many more failure modes.

     

    And the benefit?  Using old drives and computers until they fail?  This is not a good strategy for reliability!

     

    I understand and appreciate your motives, but I doubt that the product would ever move in this direction.

     

    Murray

    Friday, April 13, 2007 3:44 PM
  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote

    Hello Murray,

     

    thanks for your feedback. Well, to be more accurate the "old drives" are Seagate 120-320GB and not really old in age, but old in interface (PATA). I would not ask if I leer at my really old 10-40GB IDE drivesWink

     

    Reliability is a must, no doubt. The "benefits" are more placed in direction of the clientel which would like to buy MSHS with the possebility to integrate the existent hardware enviroment step by step.

     

    The addressed problem "more than an agent".. well I am not a programmer but one penny to the thought: If I use an external USB Box I get an driveletter for the new drive. If I share a path/volume of a W2K system it would appear within the network as a driveletter at MSHS. So this might be a solution. Anyway I tinker with the idea to get some reliable external PATA boxes to make a deal with myself Wink

    Friday, April 13, 2007 5:06 PM
  • Question
    Sign in to vote
    0
    Sign in to vote

     photoexposer wrote:
    The "benefits" are more placed in direction of the clientel which would like to buy MSHS with the possebility to integrate the existent hardware enviroment step by step.

     

    The target market as defined by Microsoft is the typical home user that wants to buy a packaged solution to solve backup, file sharing, and remote access problems.  Personally, I think that the WHS Team is wise to focus on that market.

     

    Good luck with your external drives.

    Friday, April 13, 2007 7:28 PM