Windows Home Server FAQ

Does anyone know if the Storage pool backup utility will let you backup your Computer backup files?
Or is WHSBDBD addin still the only way.
 
nitrobass24 said:
Does anyone know if the Storage pool backup utility will let you backup your Computer backup files?
Or is WHSBDBD addin still the only way.
Click to expand...

WHS BDBB is the only way to backup the PC backup database. Actually, you can do it manually via command line, but BDBB automates the manual steps. The storage pool backup utility only backs up the share folders within the storage pool.
 
Finally decided to give WHS a try but can't add any drives to the pool. The drives all show up in computer management, I can partition and format them and such there. But the drives never appear in the WHS console to add them to the drive pool. Am I missing something simple?
 
NeonFlak said:
Finally decided to give WHS a try but can't add any drives to the pool. The drives all show up in computer management, I can partition and format them and such there. But the drives never appear in the WHS console to add them to the drive pool. Am I missing something simple?
Click to expand...

Lets get a screen shot of the computer mgt screen, and the disk managment console.
 
Here's the console:
mb6fkn.jpg


Here's computer management... I have tried partitioning the drives and formating them, they still never show up in the console:
2uoqstl.jpg
 
OK

1) are they MBR disk? ie NOT GPT disks.
2) what model are they?
3) what controller are you using?

Also just for good measure, lets get a reboot....cause those should be showing up.
 
1) They are all MBR, just verified
2) 750gb Samsung F1
3) So far I have tried on various mobos all intel, ich7/9/10... also have tried from a perc 5i..

The server has been rebooted many times tonight... I will try again.

*the only time they have shown up to be added to the pool was actually on the perc 5i with them all setup as single raid0 arrays... But on this attempt I had to reboot for something and when the machine came back the drives were no longer in the pool but I had 5 new drive letters. So I started over... did a full erase on all drives and now we are where I am now. The only drive that shows up in the drive pool is the drive the OS is installed on. Have also tried a couple 640gb wd I have laying around and a couple 74gb raptors.

I have done the WHS install 5 times now, each time doing a new install instead of a reinstall.
 
Not at home now so can't remember what I had tried last, I think they may be in IDE at the moment.

Remoted to the server and formated one of the drives then rebooted. Still not showing up to be added to the drive pool.
 
Last edited:
I can view my samba shares, but I I RDP times out, and the Connector says I have the wrong password. Anyone got any ideas? I just added a drive today but thats all I changed.
 
I am going to order a copy of WHS tonight and I'm trying to decide what processor I am going to use... I have two processors to choose from (already own), however, I'll have to buy another for the 'office' computer (that I *may* game on).

I have an E8500 and a Q9300 processor currently. The existing computer I will use for WHS has an Asus P5Q-E, Enermax Liberty 550w PSU, 320GB HDD, 2x 500GB HDD, 2x 1TB HDD, 2x 1GB RAM and I'll be removing the 8800GT SSC for a cheap $20 card for install purposes. I am wondering if I should use one of the existing processors or pick up a cheap, lesser CPU for the server. I will be using the server for streaming video (HD) as well as file storage and controlling the lights in my theater.

Anything advice?
 
I wouldn't. You have 2 powerful CPU's. 1 to go in the WHS, and 1 to go in to the office computer? I would just decide which of the two gets what CPU
 
tgabe213 said:
I wouldn't. You have 2 powerful CPU's. 1 to go in the WHS, and 1 to go in to the office computer? I would just decide which of the two gets what CPU
Click to expand...
I have three computers to fill with a CPU. At one point, I'll have to get another CPU. Sorry I wasn't more clear.

In total, I have two HTPC's, one office PC, and the server (4 total). One of the HTPC's is in 24/7 use and has a Phenom x3 and a 780G mobo.
 
yamahaSHO said:
I have three computers to fill with a CPU. At one point, I'll have to get another CPU. Sorry I wasn't more clear.

In total, I have two HTPC's, one office PC, and the server (4 total). One of the HTPC's is in 24/7 use and has a Phenom x3 and a 780G mobo.
Click to expand...
Any other thoughts?
 
yamahaSHO said:
Any other thoughts?
Click to expand...
I'm sure others will tell you, if you must purchase a CPU for your WHS, just get a cheap, low powered C2D. You said it will just be streaming HD, file serving, controlling your theater lights. Any cheap C2D will be plenty powerful enough.
 
grendel19 said:
I'm sure others will tell you, if you must purchase a CPU for your WHS, just get a cheap, low powered C2D. You said it will just be streaming HD, file serving, controlling your theater lights. Any cheap C2D will be plenty powerful enough.
Click to expand...

Heck, a celeron D has enough juice.
 
After taking a look, my motherboard won't support a cheap CPU (1,300 FSB, 1600 FSB). I may just use what I have now (not sure which one will make it in the build) and build another HTPC with an i7 when the basement is done in the next few months.
 
yamahaSHO said:
After taking a look, my motherboard won't support a cheap CPU (1,300 FSB, 1600 FSB). I may just use what I have now (not sure which one will make it in the build) and build another HTPC with an i7 when the basement is done in the next few months.
Click to expand...

Here's the CPU support list for that board.

http://usa.asus.com/Product.aspx?P_ID=ogZlrSeVzUh9MKLO

Looks like it will support quite a few cheaper CPU options.
 
valve1138 said:
Here's the CPU support list for that board.

http://usa.asus.com/Product.aspx?P_ID=ogZlrSeVzUh9MKLO

Looks like it will support quite a few cheaper CPU options.
Click to expand...
Good call, I was just looking at New Egg since I was already on the site.

It looks like I'm either going to use the E8500 w/ 2GB DDR2 800MHz RAM or buy an E3200 w/ 2GB 667MHz RAM (already have the RAM in either case).

Edit: Just dropped the $55 shipped for the E3200. The E8500 will go in the 'office' build with the 8800GT SSC. It doesn't get used much with all the other computers and netbooks in the house, so I'll only use juice when needed and overclock the crap out of it :)
 
Last edited:
Ive got a question. I have WHS setup with 3 large sata drives. I can write to one at around 40 MB/s for a while over my lan, then it drops to 15MB/s. I installed Disk Management addon and I see drive 3 at 47000kb/s and drive 2 at 30000 kb/s. So I understand how I am only getting 15 MB/s, its the difference in the 2 drives activity. What I dont understand is why drive 2 ( which is almost full) is doing anything at all. Obviously theres data transfer going on between drives 2 and 3. Is it just WHS balancing the storage? I have the majority of the server set to duplication, so I am assuming thats whats happening. Just looking for a definitive answer.
 
jay2472000 said:
Ive got a question. I have WHS setup with 3 large sata drives. I can write to one at around 40 MB/s for a while over my lan, then it drops to 15MB/s. I installed Disk Management addon and I see drive 3 at 47000kb/s and drive 2 at 30000 kb/s. So I understand how I am only getting 15 MB/s, its the difference in the 2 drives activity. What I dont understand is why drive 2 ( which is almost full) is doing anything at all. Obviously theres data transfer going on between drives 2 and 3. Is it just WHS balancing the storage? I have the majority of the server set to duplication, so I am assuming thats whats happening. Just looking for a definitive answer.
Click to expand...


Yeah i notice when i 1st started to copy files over it was like 50-60MB/s and now it is down to like 11-16MB/s

I have tested with duplication on all shares, some, and none..........doesnt seem to help

I have the Acer easyShare, but i also notice then on my DIY WHS system too which has a E5300 in it.
 
well i figured out what my problem was, it was i had Symantec Endpoint Installed on the server, when i disabled Teefer2 on the NIC card it i would get 55-65MB/s on transfer.
 
Homer, its not my network, I can transfer files from my server to my main pc at over 60MB/s, and can transfer back to it at about 40 or so. It only slows when I can see the drives being accesed across the WHS pc. I assume its doing some sort of balancing. Im ordering another Tb drive and will see if it is because my server is pretty full. Im betting that its a combination of the WHS doing something with the drives, the drives are almost full, and duplication being on. Also, fwiw, this is a new server setup, so I was transferring in huge amounts of data onto it, and had duplication off, then turned it on. Im betting once I get all my data and drives on there and let it do its thing Ill probably see faster speeds again. I just found it very coincidental that of 2 drives , one had 45k activity shown, one had 30k, and my transfer dropped off to about 15, so mathematically it made sense.
 
I just picked up WHS this week and put together a spare computer for it and I can't believe I didn't get this sooner. It sure does make life easier at home! It made me realize that my old Microsoft MN-700 router wasn't cutting it anymore so I had to pick up a wireless N w/ 1GB wired network and now it rocks.!
 
this may be a stupid question (or already answered), but in my new WHS build, I was looking at an Antec earthwatts PS, but just noticed (as I was getting ready to order!) that it only has 4 SATA power connectors. Is there a cable/converter to change the regular 4 pin power connectors to SATA? Or should I just buy a higher power PS with more SATA connectors?

The case I have will hold up to 6 HDD.
 
Can you give us some more info on the rest of the system? Yes you can buy molex to sata converters. Monoprice is usually the cheapest place for those kinds of items.
 
brycejones said:
Can you give us some more info on the rest of the system? Yes you can buy molex to sata converters. Monoprice is usually the cheapest place for those kinds of items.
Click to expand...

sure!

Already have:
mother board Gigabyte GA-MA74GM-S2 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128342
case Coolermaster 335 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811119161
processor AMD 5050e http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103298

Wish list:
RAM gskill 2x1gb DDR2 800http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231098 or may go with a 1 stick 2gb option
HDD WD Green 1Tb http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822136317 start with 2, still have my externals from my first WHS

that's about it, I think. Still early in the morning and my brain hasn't fully awaken

was looking at this PSU since I have it in my HTPC and it works well Antech Earthwatts 380 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817371005
but will probably go with something bigger like the Corsair 450 (with 5 year warranty) http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817139003 or a larger Antec earthwatts 650 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817371015

I don't feel like I need a high watt PSU, since the WD Greens are such low consumption, but if I get a 600 or greater watt, it wouldn't hurt, right? I mean, they are rated at 600 + but they idle much lower. So max rating wouldn't really make a difference on the amount of power my system will use at idle, correct?
 
Last edited:
kraw said:
I don't feel like I need a high watt PSU, since the WD Greens are such low consumption, but if I get a 600 or greater watt, it wouldn't hurt, right? I mean, they are rated at 600 + but they idle much lower. So max rating wouldn't really make a difference on the amount of power my system will use at idle, correct?
Click to expand...

Would not hurt anything besides your wallet :) Max rating does make a difference of sorts in the following terms (the bold):
Paul_Johnson said:
Yes and a quick search would turn up this topic a million times over. Here is the recap:

1) APFC can fool Kill-A-Watts into giving you abnormally low readings (some times giving better than 100% efficiency)

2) Power supplies derate with temperature anywhere from 2w/c above a nominal rated at value to 10w/c.

3) Kill-A-Watt's and most power meters sample too slowly to catch transient loads (the Transient load from our tests is 117w and is COMPLETELY missed by Kill-A-Watts).

4) Power supplies last longer if you stay in the 40% to 60% range of their output.

5) power supplies are quieter if you stay in the 40% to 60% range of their output.

6) Power supplies are cooler if you stay in the 40% to 60% range of their output.

The power meters in UPS software are just as bad. You have to spend some change before you get anywhere near an accurate power meter when your PSU has APFC.
Click to expand...

So basically a higher wattage/amperage PSU would allow you to reach close to the optimal longevity, temperature and noise range for a PSU.

PSU wise, I recommend the following better bang for the buck PSU instead:
$68 - Seasonic SS-500ET 500W PSU
 
outstanding.. thanks for you help. I have spent the last week (between work of course) at my desk reading through this thread, and as always, miss the stuff I need :)
 
I have a 500w Enermax Liberty on mine... Currently running only one HDD, but I will be adding four more in a week. Currently the highest my Kill-A-Watt has read was about 106w, IIRC. I also have a 720w Enermax Infinity that I could have used, but I selected to put it in my gaming HTPC in my equipment closet as I will be using the PSU to power quite a few fans to my rack cooling all the components. I also like the function the Infiniti has of running the fans after powering down until it hits a set temperature. I thought that might be good for all my expensive equipment.

The 720w may have been better suited for a server with a lot of HDD's, but I don't really expect the HDD's to add a ton more power usage.
 
one last simple question. I did read that others have installed the OS on smaller HDD's, but it was a fairly old post. I have a 80gb WD Blue I just bought for my shuttle, turns out, I have more problems with the shuttle then the old HDD, so I now have this drive as a spare. Since there's no more landing pad (or whatever) with WHS, would I run into issues using this drive as my OS? I would prefer a smaller OS drive in case of failure so that I won't have much (if any) data loss.

I've read varying comments on putting your OS on the largest drive, but wouldn't it make sense to have it on the smallest, thus having a smaller image created for crash protection? Excuse any poor use of terms as I'm still half asleep :p

I've had my current WHS for well over year. It's an old Dell P4 2.4 with 1gb of RAM. Until last week, I had never installed any add-ins, so OS/Add-in space isn't an issue for me. Plus, I already have the drive, thus saving $
 
kraw said:
one last simple question. I did read that others have installed the OS on smaller HDD's, but it was a fairly old post. I have a 80gb WD Blue I just bought for my shuttle, turns out, I have more problems with the shuttle then the old HDD, so I now have this drive as a spare. Since there's no more landing pad (or whatever) with WHS, would I run into issues using this drive as my OS? I would prefer a smaller OS drive in case of failure so that I won't have much (if any) data loss.

I've read varying comments on putting your OS on the largest drive, but wouldn't it make sense to have it on the smallest, thus having a smaller image created for crash protection? Excuse any poor use of terms as I'm still half asleep :p

I've had my current WHS for well over year. It's an old Dell P4 2.4 with 1gb of RAM. Until last week, I had never installed any add-ins, so OS/Add-in space isn't an issue for me. Plus, I already have the drive, thus saving $
Click to expand...

Just so you know using the largest drive as a system drive is still the recommended and best practice IMO and heres why:
1) your case only has so many slots
2) you are going to replace the smallest drives with newer ones when they become available.
3) reinstalling the OS is a PITA, so having the OS on the largest disk means that you will replace it last, and reinstall less.

Now if you have a case that holds 20 drives then i guess it doesnt really matter, but if you have a case that holds 6 drives or similar are you really gonna waste that on a 80gb drive?

I used to have mine on a smaller drive cause I one laying around.
That was a mistake
Because until you do a reinstall of WHS you dont realize how much of a PITA it can be......especially when it fucks up, then its really fun.

Yes you dont need a large drive for a Landing Zone.....there is no Landing Zone any longer....since PP2 actually. They supposedly fixed it in PP1 but for those that had Vista you still had Landing Zone issues until PP2.

Some say that the space is wasted because it goes directly to the storage drives and not used....but if it went to that drive then the storage drives would be unused.
Does it really matter what drive it goes to? I think not.

Its also nice to have a large OS drive because you can repartition it to have a larger OS partition and use it for WSUS, or VM's or MediaBrowser database or whatever else you can think of.

There is no advantage to using a smaller drive.....just future headaches and wasted time that could have all been avoided by using the largest drive.
 
boy, I feel like I read that post before :) Deja Vu maybe?

I'll stick with my 1Tb or larger drives then. The next to the last line makes sense. I probably WOULD install more on this newer box.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top