Windows 8 (or Server 2012) Storage Spaces and SnapRAID

[mikehunt114]

Perhaps my googling skills are not working today, but I can't find an answer to this question:

Can I use Windows Storage Spaces solution to pool my drives only (no parity/mirroring) and SnapRAID for redundancy?

I don't like the sound of Storage Spaces software RAID performance, but I like the idea of a built-into-the-OS disk pooling feature. I currently use Liquesce and SnapRAID on my server but Liquesce has been giving me grief. I am afraid that Storage Spaces will not expose my physical drives individually, meaning that SnapRAID cannot function.

TIA

 

[odditory]

No. Storage Spaces stripes pooled disks. There is no JBOD pooling option, which is a huge disappointment - I really wished MS would have baked that in natively because third party filter drivers to accomplish similar are marginal at best, they're all bleeding edge and have issues.

Liquesce needs serious work and should only be used for testing purposes, I think Smurf-IV picked it up again, he's got a road ahead of him to get it where it needs to be.

There is no perfect JBOD pooling solution for Windows currently. But in fairness there's no perfect Linux based solution either - mhddfs and aufs each have certain behaviors that aren't ideal. FlexRAID comes closest in terms of non-striping pooling with the least amount of headaches, with DriveBender in a distant second. Both can be combined with SnapRAID. There are some screwy fringe offerings like PoolIt but theyre just not there yet and updates are few and far between.

 

[mikehunt114]

Hmm, that's disappointing. I'm not a big FlexRAID fan, even though I admit to having never used it. So I guess it's Storage Spaces with parity, or continue using Liquesce + SnapRAID. I'm not sure which is the lesser evil.

Thanks for the informative reply odditory.

 

[odditory]

Hmm, that's disappointing. I'm not a big FlexRAID fan, even though I admit to having never used it. So I guess it's Storage Spaces with parity, or continue using Liquesce + SnapRAID. I'm not sure which is the lesser evil

Your best option is trial version of FlexRAID pooling version and see for yourself. Again, you can combine FlexRAID for pooling + Snapraid for parity. I would run Storage Spaces under no circumstances, too many horror stories about data going poof. I won't look at it again until SP1 or at least 6-12 months have gone by and its settled in a bit more with some updates.

FlexRAID's pooling-only version is cheaper than the Pooling+RAID version. What I like about FlexRAID's pooling vs DriveBender's is #1 it won't create a zillion dupe folders across all your drives - DB will. #2 Auto-folder priority mode actually works - meaning it will fill up a disk at a time if you so choose, whereas DB will scatter files written to the pool across all the disks in the pool and there's no way to turn that off. #3 if you don't disable DB's default drive balancing feature its constantly moving your files around among drives and creates havoc for SnapRAID by making its sync operation 10x more laborious since its having to constantly regenerate parity data even with no new files added to the pool. Its also extra wear & tear on the drives, but worst of all it increases risk of data loss because parity is out of sync after a drive balancing operation. DB could be awesome with a few extra options and tweaks but their devs are braindead about considering them.

This is a big deal because let's say you copy a Bluray folder-based rip to a FlexRAID pool - guaranteed it will land on a single disk and not split up among multiple. Even in auto space priority mode (balancing free space as evenly as possible among drives) FlexRAID will still attempt to minimize folder splits.

With DB on the other hand, copy a Bluray folder rip to the pool and every single file gets written to a different disk round-robin style. So not only does this scatter your files everywhere and create a folder nightmare if you ever had to forcefully remove a disk from the pool, but when you play back that movie every disk in the pool has to spin up, defeating one of the biggest benefits JBOD pooling has over striped pooling which is only needing to spin up a disk at a time when reading or writing to the pool.

 

[mikehunt114]

I tried DriveBender in the past, but didn't like the same issues you've mentioned - I don't like it screwing around with my files.

I want a pooled array that writes files to a disk until it's full, then move on to the next available disk. I want it expandable and to work with different sized disks. I want some redundancy, but don't need to get carried away.

I am happy with SnapRAID atm, even though I have not yet had to perform any recoveries. My data is not critical (media server) so at this point I am simply happy to have peace of mind that I have some form of recovery. I'm also happy that since Liquesce does not interfere with the actual files on my disks, the most I will lose even in the event that SnapRAID fails me, is the single failed disk. I can take any disk out and it's read just like any other NTFS drive.

What I'm not happy with is the performance of Liquesce. The intent of the program perfectly suits my needs but it's just not "there" yet. I have issues with it not respecting full disks and moving on to the next, and issues with read/write speeds. There are some other issues but I could probably live with those ones if these main two were addressed. I'm not blaming the dev, I'm actually happy with Smurf's efforts but I know what it's like to try and develop a project like that in your spare time, therefore I don't expect the same level of support as from a paid application. And at this point I guess I'm not willing to pay for an application to do this for me, ie. FlexRAID. I know that's my choice.

Anyway, enough of the the rant, I had simply hoped for more when I stumbled across this Storage Spaces.

 

[Wladyslaw]

I have tried pretty much all of the pooling solutions. I too want a snapraid + pooling solution on the chreap (free). Snapraid is great, but so far I am struggling to find a pooling solution that works well. As mentioned many times beforre, liquescue is free and lightweight, well suited for the job but is quite glitchy right now. Although it looks like development is back on-line with it. Poolit free worked very well for 2 disks, but at $40 for the full one I dont think its worth it, and I would need to set it with more disks.

 

[mls1995]

I'm not a big FlexRAID fan, even though I admit to having never used it.

How can you have an opinion then? I own FlexRAID (I own both pooling + parity) and once you set it up it's pretty sweet. I've ran it in Windows 7 and Windows 8. While I had some trouble getting it up and running on Windows 8, I have it figured out now. FlexRAID is worth the money!

 

[mls1995]

This is a big deal because let's say you copy a Bluray folder-based rip to a FlexRAID pool - guaranteed it will land on a single disk and not split up among multiple.

True, I can vouch for this! FlexRAID does not mess up your data, if you hate it you can uninstall and delete the flx folders and everything is back to normal. No changes/harm to your data.

 

[saranya]

I can 3rd vouch for flexraid. it's saved me me a couple times over the past year from bad seagate drives.

 

[hotcrandel]

I've also had good luck with flexRAID. WD Green Drives work fine with it.

 

[omniscence]

But in fairness there's no perfect Linux based solution either - mhddfs and aufs each have certain behaviors that aren't ideal.

May I ask what you don't like about aufs?

 

[mikehunt114]

How can you have an opinion then? I own FlexRAID (I own both pooling + parity) and once you set it up it's pretty sweet. I've ran it in Windows 7 and Windows 8. While I had some trouble getting it up and running on Windows 8, I have it figured out now. FlexRAID is worth the money!

I can have any opinion I like, that's just how I feel.

If you want to know why, it's because I installed a trial version of the software and it expired prematurely and I never really got a chance to test it, very annoying. I've also read about as many bad reviews as good ones for the software, and I understand that the creator has moved on to another project now. All in all I'm just not comfortable spending $30 on it right now.