Jump to content
Division-M Community

TobiMan

Members
  • Content Count

    41
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Everything posted by TobiMan

  1. I stand corrected... obviously DriveBender needs some time to cache the whole shebang. Works pretty cool, thanks @Anthony. @fattipants2016give it a try!
  2. Unfortunately yes... accessing folders with greater content [files or subfolders] takes up to 2 minutes for the first time, access after that is faster, but still takes 1 minute or slightly more.
  3. From the Blog: The next feature is one we have called “Drive Idle”… over the years, a common concern with drive pooling is 1) power consumption and 2) drive wear and tear. Every time a pool is accessed, it can require many, if not all drives in the pool to spin up. In fact, this access is often a third-party app indexing the pool as a background task, again, often requiring the entire pool to spin up. Our Drive Idle technology is designed to prevent these spin ups, or, at the very least limit them. This feature should also improve pool performance and responsiveness. From my understanding, Drive Idle caches the location of the files and only spins up the necessary HDD for access, so other HDDs in the pool can remain spinned down. From my experiences, this feature still needs some tweaking concidering speed, but we are still in Beta, so no need for worries.
  4. I've realized that, when Drive Idle is enabled, opening a folder with many child folders [about 1.300 in my case] is very time consuming [about 1 minute]. I think that is not the desired behaviour, is there anything that I can do from my side to improve performance? Thanks Tobi
  5. As CBers already suggested, uninstalling and reinstalling resolves the issue. Maybe installing over an existing installation does not work in all cases.
  6. Same issue here. Starting the service manually results in error 1067: the process was terminated unexpectedly [translated from German, I dont' know the exact error text in English).
  7. Thanks for sharing, I'll give it a try...!
  8. I ran into the same issue but frankly didn't give it another thought, as Drive Bender is working. However, your're right. The dll version in the programs folder is still the older one. So thanks for pointing this out! If you've got a solution it would be nice if you would share it...
  9. Wow... who would have thought of this? Glad to hear it works now!
  10. Mhh... maybe it's a graphic issue? Some time ago the DB Client crashed upon start, because I adjusted the windows font size to be larger than 100%. Have you made some adjustments like that or are you using some eyecandy software? You could try starting the DriveBenderConsole.exe, which is on older version of the client, it should be in the same directory. If this works as expected, I would guess it's a graphical issue, be it with the DB Client or with your machine/OS.
  11. The client is running fine on my machine. As you have no problems to connect, it shouldn't be a firewall issue. Frankly I have no idea, sorry...
  12. I have to manually start the service "Server", since I'm running DB 2.4.0.0. now and then. Is anybody else having problems with DriveBender related services not starting automatically?
  13. Yes, I had to start the DriveBender Service manually for the first time, after another reboot of the server it started automatically. For the moment I am not aware of any issues, but it's just running 10 minutes
  14. It's ok for me, although I did not have any issues before. By the way... could that routine be applied to the standalone version of DB-Manager too (instead of being prompted to uninstall the previous verson first)? But we can skip the reboot here, I guess...
  15. Just an update on the issue [request (#11799)] from Divison-M, if somebody is interested: "Hi Tobias, This is an issue we are investigating. I should point out that it is not a serious problem, and won't affect pool operation."
  16. If I'm not mistaken, you can use the DB-Manager. In the upper left corner is a small box where you can change the drive letter for the pool.
  17. Thanks for letting me know. I'll check the memory usage and will open a ticket when appropriate.
  18. Hi, since version 2350 (I'm not that sure, could be later) I'm seeing the above mentioned entries in the log file. Is this something I should be worried about? The folders are set for duplication. What they have in common are "special letters" like: Árstí∂ir Lífsins or Negură Bunget. Thanks for any suggestions, Tobias
  19. Same here, just cosmetical I think...
  20. Release v2.3.5.0 release (2015-06-01) The file balancing intervals could be set to a value that was not expected. SMART settings for individual drives was not taking effect. The SMART service and Windows tray application can use excessive CPU when the host machine comes out of sleep mode. Scheduled tasks can fail to load on start-up. The core driver is spamming the Windows event log. If the pool switches to fault tolerant mode, the duplicate file may not be displayed. On some occasions it is not possible to create a network mount point. Improved the efficiently of the pool health check. Fixed a font issue with the duplication manager. Windows 10 support.
  21. You're right. But you can copy and paste the link and replace the 2 with a 3 ;-) http://files.division-m.com/CloudXtender%20v1030.exe
  22. I'm using Microsofts RD Client app for iOS for the moment. Not that comfortable (at least on iPhone, don't know about iPad), but it does the job if you wan't to take a quick look. An official DB app would definitely be very cool !
  23. Found the answer here: http://support.division-m.com/entries/23392765-Can-I-use-duplication-with-a-pooled-networked-drive- So DB is aware of two or more partitions on the same drive, as long as it is no network drive. You really made me afraid for one day .
  24. Hi w3wilkes, sure, both partitions are in the pool. I choosed that way because I still hope for DB to support VSS, which is limited to 2TB . Ahm... if I understand you correctly, DB does not recognise that 2 partitions are on the same physical drive? You are 100 % sure about that?
  25. Hi, I've just replaced a HD within my pool and realised the following during the swapping procedure: 1. DB reads the file to be moved to the new HD 2. DB writes the file to the new HD 3. DB reads the file again for verifying from the old HD and builds a CRC sum 4. DB checks against the file on the new HD Couldn't step 3 combined with step 1, so the file to be moved would be read once instead of twice? Thanks Tobias
×
×
  • Create New...