I am starting to feel that people on the forums make WHS posts for the sole purpose of provoking rather than researching. I also see the same questions come up time after time again.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Move to WHS from Linux Raid5...
- Thread starter Phimp
- Start date
I am starting to feel that people on the forums make WHS posts for the sole purpose of provoking rather than researching. I also see the same questions come up time after time again.
The reason I use RAID 5/6 is for protection against drive failure. I have yet to have a controller die on me or a hardware RAID corrupt, although I have had many drives die on me. And quite frankly I couldn't care less about scaling down a RAID array or yanking a drive to pull the data from it. While admittedly shrinking would be nice and fairly simple for programmers to add, it's not required. The benefits of the matriix are only beneficial to people that need them, to the rest of us it's more money spent on additional drives for the same amount of online storage space.
As for WHS, yeah it isn't really RAID. What it does in terms of data protection is essentially equivalent in function to the vast majority of people, insofar as the OS (software) directs writes to the mirrored folder to two drives instead of one.
I prefer redundancy with a size of (n-1)*drive capacity instead of (n/2)*capacity because I get more space and I only need one extra drive past what I'd need for (n/2)*capacity in the first place to fill out the drives in the bank vault that hold my complete offline backup instead of n extras.
Adidas4275 already posted a link to the trial signup page.[LYL]Homer;1033321745 said:
Thanks though!
But what I meant was I wish the trial was just a downloadable .iso rather than having to wait for up to 3 weeks to get the dvd... I was hoping to purchase WHS soon, so I want to be able to get a peak at WHS asap.
I guess I'm just impatient
lolThere's just one thing that's been worrying me about folder duplication that I'm sure someone can shed some light on...
Folder duplication can be turned on for individual shares... but can it be implemented for individual folders within shares?
I'm worrying that it can't.
This would be a headache because Instead of having a single share named "Media" for all my music/video, I would need have to split it up into a few different shares for Music, Movies, HD-Movies if I didn't want to duplicate everything.
And say I have 700 episodes of over 20 tv shows, but I only really want to make sure about 4 of those shows are duplicated... it starts to get interesting...
So is duplication only implementable on the Shares?
Otherwise I guess I'll have to have a separate drive that is NOT added to the storage pool, in the server to manually copy the important stuff (within non-duplicated shares) to.
Off-topic:
Ockie, I think I found the case you need to use for your next Galaxy build.
Chenbro 9U 50-Bay Storage Center Server Chassis
lolI'd kill to have that thing! But then I'd have to sell a kidney to afford to fill it with drives
[LYL]Homer
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2004
- Messages
- 4,209
Duplication is done only at the top level shares, so the answer is no to your question. But separating out those 4 shows to a different share that is duplicated can't be all that difficult. I haven't tried it but I think you could just put a folder for the duped shows in your non-duped list with a shortcut to episodes on the duped share - if you want everything to appear as if it is in one share.
BTW, WHS already comes with shares for Videos, Music, Photos, Public, & Software that you can't remove (at least from the WHS console) so your top level Media folder becomes redundant.
BTW, WHS already comes with shares for Videos, Music, Photos, Public, & Software that you can't remove (at least from the WHS console) so your top level Media folder becomes redundant.
[LYL]Homer;1033323333 said:
Ya, I don't really care about the pre-set default shares, because the shares I'll use will be mapped as network drives on the computers on my network.
Which is kinda why I would like to have it as simple as possible...
Right now, I have Backup, Business, Canon40D, Data, and Media.
I guess I'll create separate shares like Media and Media-duped, and shortcut to each folder that's in Media-duped within Media.
like this...
Code:
\\Server\Media\TV\
\\Server\Media\TV\The Office\
\\Server\Media\TV\The Shield.lnk (Shortcut to \\Server\Media-duped\TV\The Shield\)
\\Server\Media\Movies\
\\Server\Media\Movies\HD\ (Shortcut to \\Server\Media-duped\Movies\HD\Can't really do file management as easy since right clicking on a folder and going to properties to check the size of my TV folder would be innacurate since 5 of the files are only shortcuts and not the actual folders containing like 50 GB each. But I'll live.
It's either that method, or use something like SyncToy to do the backup itself to a separate hard drive that's not in the pool... so I can have it backup only the specific files/folders I wanted protection for, then just skip the whole share-duplication fiasco.
I will be managing files and such through FTP though, I normally set all Shares to readable by guest/anonymous. And then use FTP to copy files over and such.
So I hope FTP speeds are comparable to what I have now with Openfiler, about 22 MB/s and that's with 3x 750GB WD Green drives that only run at 5400rpm in raid5.
I was in a similar situation where I already had a Shares scheme that I was used to. Once I moved to WHS, I found the eaisest method is to just adapt instead of fighting it. In your case though, I think it would make sense to split up the "Media" share into separate Music and Videos shares.
Are you using FTP for local access to the files? I'm just wondering why. What is wrong with SMB?
Are you using FTP for local access to the files? I'm just wondering why. What is wrong with SMB?
I use FTP locally for anything that involves Writing, moving files, copying files to the server, etc.
Mainly because it protects against ANYONE on the network accidentally deleting a file over SMB and not having the protection of a Recycle Bin since it's networked.
In most cases, Users with permissions would work but my computer would have the username that has full access, and occasionally someone uses my computer for a few things. So I don't want anyone on my computer to have full access.
Right now, I hit a single shortcut key at the top of my keyboard, FlashFXP opens up and i click on the dropdown menu and connect to the server. then click&drag files over to the server if I'm adding something.
And the only reason I don't want to split the shares up into the pre-set Shares like Videos, Music, etc. Is because I have all the shares I use mapped as drive letters. I don't want my "My Computer" window to look like a zoo with 30 drive letters =p I like having a single drive letter designated for my Media (Music, Movies, TV shows, videos, etc.)
And I like having them mapped as drive letters.
But I think I'm going to go with the single share for "Media" and ignore the pre-set ones. And just manually backup the the music and videos that I want backed up to an extra couple 250 GB drives that aren't added to the pool. Makes everything a lot easier for me and I don't have to worry about selectively duplicating certain tv shows/movies/music/etc.
Oh, and I'll also be using FTP from places away from home like a friends house, have an account set up that has read access to just my Media, and write access to a single public folder. So that if the connection wasn't secure or something because it's at a public hotspot or something, the worst they can do is listen to my music and upload files (to a public folder with a quota set so they can't upload too much).
I'll also be using WHS's web interface feature for downloading .zip compressions of folders, etc. but having the convenience of an FTP queue is better. I'm sure FileZilla will work well as a server on WHS.
There is always a first time. Keep in mind, I work in this industry and I see plenty of failures.
There is a reason why they have duplex raid or mirrored raid arrays (not drives, but entire arrays), and there is also the reason why you will see any serious array has a tape drive backup method attached
Yes and no. No as in you can't do it default, yes as in if you are clever with your drive mapping and folder structures you can mimick this need.
Ockie, I think I found the case you need to use for your next Galaxy build.
Chenbro 9U 50-Bay Storage Center Server Chassis
I'd kill to have that thing! But then I'd have to sell a kidney to afford to fill it with drives
I have a 5u in mind which holds 50 drives
Smaller and more efficient. But either way, I'm much more happier with my current modular storage soltution, it's super dynamic and scalable.[LYL]Homer
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2004
- Messages
- 4,209
Phimp -
My suggestion to you would be to get your WHS setup going and see how it works out of the box. Those of us that have used WHS for a while see our own struggle with accepting/understanding at first how WHS works in the questions and responses you are posing.
You, as we did, are asking how to undo what WHS does so well because it is what we were used to. Drive mapping, for example - there are shares and not drives in WHS. File management is a place where WHS shines - because you don't really have to worry about space or moving files from drive to drive.
Try out the default shares for a few days, get to know why we all like WHS. If you are bent on recreating your current media setup you may be frustrated, disappointed, and no better off.
My suggestion to you would be to get your WHS setup going and see how it works out of the box. Those of us that have used WHS for a while see our own struggle with accepting/understanding at first how WHS works in the questions and responses you are posing.
You, as we did, are asking how to undo what WHS does so well because it is what we were used to. Drive mapping, for example - there are shares and not drives in WHS. File management is a place where WHS shines - because you don't really have to worry about space or moving files from drive to drive.
Try out the default shares for a few days, get to know why we all like WHS. If you are bent on recreating your current media setup you may be frustrated, disappointed, and no better off.
Thats what I was trying to say im my post above. I also had a whole plan that I was going to implement once I got WHS installed concerning how I was going to manage shares. Turns out, just like Homer is saying, you end up just conforming to WHS's default management as it is just easy and foolproof.
I, like others, suggest just getting in installed and just use it the way it is by default. You will see the way its setup is why its so great.
I, like others, suggest just getting in installed and just use it the way it is by default. You will see the way its setup is why its so great.
coo-coo-clocker
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2007
- Messages
- 183
all you WHS fanboys are making me want to buy a copy just to play with it
Don't buy it, get the evaluation copy. http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/winfamily/windowshomeserver/eval.mspx
Trepidati0n
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2004
- Messages
- 9,269
Because:
1) That would make you a smuck
2) You might as well pirate all your games while you are at it
3) You are telling the developers they have no value and shouldn't bother to every write code again.
The fact that you even think this is a "good idea" shows the integrity of who you are. However...you can't do it anyways, I think you still have to activate your evaluation copy.
Because:
1) That would make you a smuck
2) You might as well pirate all your games while you are at it
3) You are telling the developers they have no value and shouldn't bother to every write code again.
The fact that you even think this is a "good idea" shows the integrity of who you are. However...you can't do it anyways, I think you still have to activate your evaluation copy.
Nowhere did I state that this would be a "good idea". So I'd appreciate it if, in the future, you would revise your posts before taking a shot at someone's level of integrity.
If you like the software, you should buy it. Period. That's what the trial is for - to test out the software and if you think it's worth the money, you buy it.
I don't condone piracy, I was only pointing out my concerns for this being possible.
I would sure as hell hope there is some sort of protection against this.
If you tried to install over the existing trial, I am almost certain that it would deny you to do so. But formatting over the partition would probably remove that protection, so I think it's kinda stupid that Microsoft made the trial last for 4 months. If it were a 30 day trial, cheap bastards would be less inclined to go through a re installation and setting up their accounts/settings again, if they had to do it every couple weeks.
Although, I guess if you do only have 30 days to activate your trial. So technically it would be a 30 day trial for those trying to bypass purchasing the OS.
Anyways, NewEgg seems to be the cheapest place for WHS at $99. I'm hoping Black Friday weilds a good deal on it, but doubtful.
And has WHS shipped including PP1 in the installation yet? Or is it only available as a separate installation after you install WHS?
[LYL]Homer
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2004
- Messages
- 4,209
As a server I want everything stable and to not have to mess with it. MS is pricing WHS super reasonably.
And there's a little more to it than reinstallation plus 5 minutes.
Man that would be a lot of work every 3 months. I suppose you can do that, but damn, imagine forgetting once
You'd be locked out.[LYL]Homer;1033342501 said:
Agreed, on both accounts.
... but damn, imagine forgetting once
Screw locking people out, it should go into a self destruct sequence.
You have five hours to purchase and enter a valid Windows Home Server Key before your hard drive(s) firmware is flashed with zero's and your CPU multiplier and voltage will increase at a rapid pace until spontaneous combustion takes place.
For more information or to talk to a tech support representative, please visit:
Microsoft.com/self_destruct
That'll teach some people a lesson in mooching off of trials forever.
Well, I suppose I'll wait for my WHS Trial disc to come in the mail, and pick up at least a single 1TB drive asap, hopefully 2 on Black Friday, so I can have somewhere to move my current raid5 storage over to while I install and then add the drives to the WHS storage pool.
Then make it a priority to purchase WHS sometime within a month or two after that so I can scout around and hope for a deal to pop up. (You never know when a deal will pop up on somethin you are about to buy
And if not, $99 ain't that bad at all and definitely worth it from what I know about WHS.)More WHS Questions:
Say you have 200 GB of files (full DVD video_ts folders for example) and you move them from \\WHS\Videos to \\WHS\DVDs (just from share to share)... is WHS smart enough to be able to leave the files where they are located in the storage pool? Or will it take a while for them to relocate from drive to drive as it moves them to wherever it sees fit?
Also... When you have a few shares with duplication turned on, and you are copying hundreds of GB to each share with a minute or two break here and there to reorganize files and such... Is the WHS pool going to be pretty fragmented over time? Or will it wait to "balance" the storage and make sure the shares are fully duplicated, till there's been no activity for a couple minutes?
Trepidati0n
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2004
- Messages
- 9,269
No, WHS is not that smart (yet). It considers the copy to a different share a "new write" and thus all the data movement rules apply. This can also land up be a low performance spot for WHS since if you are read/writing to the same drive, it is like making a large duplicate file on your PC. This issue has been brought up the developers and they say they are fixing it for the next version of WHS. This is also why I try to use as few shares as possible.
While the file itself may be fragmented on the disk itself is not fragmented across multiple disks...even with duplication. Each file exists uniquely on a drive. Therefore if you have duplication turned on, there will be two unique files, each fully contained on separate drives. As for defraging files on a disk, the commercial ($) defrag (perfect disk, diskeeper) plugins will take care of that.
Unfortunetly, when you try to move files from share to share when you are on a client machine, it actually starts copying the files to the client machine, THEN to the new share on the server. Annoying. I just have a shortcut to an RDP connection for my WHS box and move files around that way. An example is when a torrent is done downloading, it gets put into my \\SERVER\Torrents share, and then I RDP in and move it to to the share I want it, depending on what it is.
Yeah, WHS is not that smart yet, but it's smart enough to realize that you are doing a localized copy, so it's rather quick.
Just keep in mind, if you localize your copying, you will need to reset permissions on the entire directory. WHS keeps permissions only for files which enters via it's share base and not on local levels. This is a "Feature" I guess in that you can't accidentally dump local files into a directory that you dont want to be seen.
Just keep in mind, if you localize your copying, you will need to reset permissions on the entire directory. WHS keeps permissions only for files which enters via it's share base and not on local levels. This is a "Feature" I guess in that you can't accidentally dump local files into a directory that you dont want to be seen.
Moving from share to share... lol... I almost lost all my hair in that process.
[LYL]Homer
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2004
- Messages
- 4,209
I have a subfolder in \\Video\ for DVD's.
You don't actually wait for that to happen to do you? Just RDP in and move stuff around that way.
Somehow I feel stupid asking you of all people this, but o well.