WHS "VAIL" RC0 and SBS "Aurora" RC0 Available

Status
Not open for further replies.
I have to echo the sentiments of a few people here. You can't compare WHSv1 or WHSv2 to RAID, I mean really. It was never intended to "replace" that in terms of efficient redundancy. However, for those of us who are or are planning (as I am) to use RAID the additional 12% overhead of simply using WHSv2 WITHOUT duplication is an actual fair consideration/comparison when looking at say Server 2008 R2 with some shares against WHSv2 without duplication.
 
pirivan said:
I have to echo the sentiments of a few people here. You can't compare WHSv1 or WHSv2 to RAID, I mean really. It was never intended to "replace" that in terms of efficient redundancy. However, for those of us who are or are planning (as I am) to use RAID the additional 12% overhead of simply using WHSv2 WITHOUT duplication is an actual fair consideration/comparison when looking at say Server 2008 R2 with some shares against WHSv2 without duplication.
Click to expand...

Maybe we will be able to disable the ECC checking. I doubt it, but maybe.
 
You can't equate WHS v1 and Vail just because they use duplication. The key difference is in Vail its mandatory otherwise you risk losing all data. In WHSv1 many people run with duplication turned off for a lot of shares and with the peace of mind that a disk failure won't take everything down.

Raid or WHS, you are still better off backing up data offline, that goes without saying.

WHS/Vail is not and never was intended to be an enthusiast product
Click to expand...

OEM copies of WHS are on newegg and sold well. It was definitely encouraged by MS to build your own server.
 
MrCrispy said:
You can't equate WHS v1 and Vail just because they use duplication. The key difference is in Vail its mandatory otherwise you risk losing all data.
Click to expand...

This is still incorrect. if you don't duplicate everything, you will not lose everything if a drive fails. you only risk losing the non-duplicated data that happens to be on that drive. Any issues around this were a bug from the first preview. The refresh addressed this problem.
 
Last edited:
griffinhart said:
This is still incorrect. if you don't duplicate everything, you will not lose everything if a drive fails. you only risk losing the non-duplicated data that happens to be on that drive...
Click to expand...

But what I am seeing is that the 1GB data chunks have a tendency to be split across different drives, which increases the risk that a single drive failure affects files that reside on more than just 1 drive. A file may not reside entirely on 1 drive anymore. This is why it is 'mandatory', because now without duplication it is uncertain if what you say is actually true.

Or does the refresh guarantee that all chunks of a particular file reside on a single drive?

-Cool-
 
bump?

just trying out vail myself and am pretty disappointed then found this thread lol

my user accounts also just vanished? Clicking on add user does nothing
 
Since I was the last insightful post, I proclaim that I win the thread, pass go, and collect $200. :D

-Cool-
 
BTW, can the OP or a mod change the title of this thread to "Public Preview" as announced by Microsoft?
This release is far from being a Release Candidate, more like an early traditional Beta 1.

Release Candidate builds come after Beta builds, at a frustrating stage when only show-stopper bugs are considered by the daily war room, and that's mostly security bugs.
 
Drive Extender Cut from Home Server

http://www.mswhs.com/2010/11/drive-extender-cut-from-home-server/

Haha, as said in my last reply here, Vail = Vista! all over again

I will be happy camper on WHS v1 for some time, and when I upgrade the server hardware I will be probable moving to SBS 2011 w/ FlexRAiD View + Live

EDIT; saw that we already got the thread going on
 
Last edited:
Seriously...you bumped this thread when there was already a thread on it on the first page?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top