Trouble with Storage space.

I'm running out of space in my hard drive. Can I transfer my movies I have purchased to an external drive and gain that storage space?

Yes, you can, but you have to put them on the external, then hold down the option key while dragging them to iTunes so iTunes does not automatically place a copy in your main media location. If they are already in iTunes you will also end up with a duplicate entry which, after deleting from the main drive, will end up with a ! next to it and you can delete the old entry. However, should you forget to turn on the external drive before starting iTunes, iTunes will also give you a ! for the files on the external. I haven't tried this but maybe quitting iTunes, starting the drive, then restarting iTunes might fix that.
Many people just go with the option of having their complete iTunes collection on an external drive, by dragging the iTunes folder to the external, then starting iTunes with the option key held down and guiding it to the external.

Similar Messages

3 Node hyper-V 2012 R2 Failover Clustering with Storage spaces on one of the Hyper-V hosts

Hi,
We have 3x Dell R720s with 5x 600GB 3.5 15K SAS and 128 GB RAM each. Was wondering if I could setup a Fail-over Hyper-V 2012 R2 Clustering with these 3 with the shared storage for the CSV being provided by one of the Hyper-V hosts with storage spaces installed
(Is storage spaces supported on Hyper-V?) Or I can use a 2-Node Failover clustering and the third one as a standalone Hyper-V or Server 2012 R2 with Hyper-V and storage spaces.
Each Server comes with QP 1G and a DP10G nics so that I can dedicate the 10G nics for iSCSI
Dont have a SAN or a 10G switch so it would be a crossover cable connection between the servers.
Most of the VMs would be Non-HA. Exchange 2010, Sharepoint 2010 and SQL Server 2008 R2 would be the only VMS running as HA-VMs. CSV for the Hyper-V Failover cluster would be provided by the storage spaces.

I thought I was tying to do just that with 8x600 GB RAID-10 using the H/W RAID controller (on the 3rd Server) and creating CSVs out of that space so as to provide better storage performance for the HA-VMs.
1. Storage Server : 8x 600GB RAID-10 (For CSVs to house all HA-VMs running on the other 2 Servers) It may also run some local VMs that have very little disk I/O
2. Hyper-V-1 : Will act has primary HYPER-V hopst for 2x Exchange and Database Server HA-VMs (the VMDXs would be stored on the Storage Servers CSVs on top of the 8x600GB RAID-10). May also run some non-HA VMs using the local 2x600 GB in RAID-1
3. Hyper-V-2 : Will act as a Hyper-V host when the above HA-VMs fail-over to this one (when HYPER-V-1 is down for any reason). May also run some non-HA VMs using the local 2x600 GB in RAID-1
The single point of failure for the HA-VMs (non HA-VMs are non-HA so its OK if they are down for some time) is the Storage Server. The Exchange servers here are DAG peers to the Exchange Servers at the head office so in case the storage server mainboard
goes down (disk failure is mitigated using RAID, other components such as RAM, mainboard may still go but their % failure is relatively low) the local exchange servers would be down but exchange clients will still be able to do their email related tasks using
the HO Exchange servers.
Also they are under 4hr mission critical support including entire server replacement within the 4 hour period.
If you're OK with your shared storage being a single point of failure then sure you can proceed the way you've listed. However you'll still route all VM-related I/O over Ethernet which is obviously slower then running VMs from DAS (with or without virtual SAN
LUN-to-LUN replication layer) as DAS has higher bandwidth and smaller latency. Also with your scenario you exclude one host from your hypervisor cluster so running VMs on a pair of hosts instead of three would give you much worse performance and resilience:
with 1 from 3 physical hosts lost cluster would be still operable and with 1 from 2 lost all VMs booted on a single node could give you inadequate performance. So make sure your hosts would be insanely underprovisioned as every single node should be able to
handle ALL workload in case of disaster. Good luck and happy clustering :)
StarWind VSAN [Virtual SAN] clusters Hyper-V without SAS, Fibre Channel, SMB 3.0 or iSCSI, uses Ethernet to mirror internally mounted SATA disks between hosts.

I am having trouble with disk space,

I am having trouble with disk space, I am always getting the error message that I need to delete files on my start up disk, I am all out of space. I cant even save a file to my desktop without getting the message, Is there a way I can free up space. I am not very computer savvy, being a pensioner I cannot afford expensive options. I was familiar with the old apple imac, but I was given a macbook pro for my birthday, and am trying to work it out. I use it mostly for photos and web.

Jillian,
I'm assuming this is a second-hand machine. If it is brand new, get it to Apple because it's their problem, not yours.
First thing you should do is go to Programs: Utilities: Disk Utlity and choose "Repair Permissions." If you don't have the OS X system disk (a DVD) go ahead and verify the Disk. It can't fix itself, so to speak, but can tell you if there is a problem. iIf you have the OS X system disk then boot off the disk, go to Disk Utility, and run Repair Disk. Assuming all is OK:
You don't need to download any programs to get started on figuring out why all your space is gone. Try this first:
Oh, when deleting, especially at first, you may have to move only small folders or even files, of 100 MB or so to the trash, then empty the trash. As the free space increases, you can trash progressively larger files. To delete files, the computer needs to create even more files to tell it what files it is deleting before it deletes them. I know, go figure.;)
It would not be a bad idea, and is in fact a very good idea, to run the disk utility "Repair permissions" after every half-dozen trash/empty trash cycles and then restart the computer.
The basic plan is to search for unreasonably sized folders.
From the Finder:
Open a window, click in the window and then:
Go to menu item View. (If you click on the desktop instead of a window, you'll get a different set of view options, none of which is the one you want.)
Click on it and move the cursor to the bottom choice, Show View Options (alternative Apple (Command)-J). Make sure the checkbox "Calculate all sizes" is checked. If it isn't, check it and then click on "Use as default" When checked, it will show you the size of a folder. If it was unchecked, don't be surprised if nothing seems to be happening as it will take awhile for the computer to calculate the size of, literally, thousands of folders. But some will start to show up right away. If you open a new window and don't see any folder sizes, Repeat the Show View Options routine above and if Calculate all sizes is checked, just wait.
I've heard you Aussies enjoy a beer or two. If your Mac has to calculate all the folder sizes, this might well be a good time to have a cold one or two, as it will take some time.
Go to the root level, which is "Computer" or "_Your Disk Name_," generically Macintosh under Devices in the sidebar.
Make sure you are in list view and can have the size column visible. Click on it (turns blue-grey) and it will sort by size, large to small or the reverse. Click again to reverse the sort order.
On my 10.6.8 machine, I have
98 GB under Users.
22 GB under Applications. If you only have the Apple-supplied applications, you probably have between 4 and 6 GB here.
Library is 24.5 GB
System is 4.6 GB
Other than a few trivially small files or folders, that should be about it for the root level.
If you have two System files, you shouldn't, and will need to get rid of one. Ask for advice before deleting one or the other. If you have a, "Previous System," or "Old System," -- can't remember the language, you can proably safely delete it if you are satisified with how your computer is working.
The Library is a candidate for bloat. Some applications, especially those that manipulate audio or video, store the bulk of their code, generally resources of one type or the other, in the Application Support folder. For instance, I have a 10.5 GB folder of Live Type in my Application Support folder. Honestly, I don't know what program it is for, but don't care because I upgraded to a 3/4 TB drive. In contrast, on my 10.7.1 computer, which has little more than the Apple supplied software on it at this point, uses only 1.5 GB for Application Support. The support folders will remain even if the program itself is deleted. As a general rule, I wouldn't bother checking out anything under 300 MB or so. Any folders over that, you should note for possible deletion _but_ be sure to ask someone with more knowledge about this what it is used for before deleting. If it is used for some program that isn't on your machine, meaning the program has been deleted, you can safely delete it. If the program is still on the machine, decide if you will use that program and, if not, delete the program and its application support files.
My next largest folder in the Library is Audio at 2.7 GB. I have audio editing programs, so that makes sense. You probaby have one also, but shouldn't be over 500 MB or so.
Next is Printers at 1.4 GB. This is a good place to clear up space. You'll see folders with various printer brands. Do you have a Brother printer? No? Trash it. Just keep the folder with your printer brand and the PPD folder and trash the rest. If you want to get real fancy, open your brands folder and delete the files for every model other than the one you have.
My next largest is Fonts at 490 MB. Leave that alone. In fact, unless Fonts is something insane like 2 GBs, stop deleting from the Library.
Go to Users. There could be between one and more than one user. (Fudge of an answer there.) There is no such thing as a guideline for user folder size. Is there a previous user? If so, check with them and see if you can delete it. I have a "dummy" administrative - level user that can be used for some esoteric rescue operations and it takes up a trivial 33 KB or something like that while my own account is pushing 100 GB.
You'll see several folders, Music, Pictures, Desktop, etc. This is stuff you or the previous user have created. If you don't want it, delete it. You will also see, aha! another Library folder. There shouldn't be many folders over 100 MB here except for Mail and our friend Application Support. I get a lot of mail, rarely delete any, and have carried it over from 10.3 and measures out at 3.7GB. Still, if its someone elses mail and you don't want it, you can delete it, but again, check with more knowledgable people as there are probably some files and folders you absolutely should not delete, others that you should delete from within Mail, and some you can manually delete.
My Application Support Folder weighs in at 1.4 GBs, of which 1.2 GBs is for Final Vinyl. That's a lot. Sneaky sucker stored some untitled audio files in there. Bye! OK, now the Application Support folder is down to 145 MB. So, I'd say anything much over that should be investigated for possible deletion. Close up Library and move on.
Downloads may be very small or very large. Depends on how meticulous the previous user was in deleting or moving to a more appropriate location. Ask them if there is anything they want, and if no, delete it.
My Application folder has Zero KB because I always install at the root, administrative level. If there is anything there, figure out if you want to use it or not. If not, trash it.
Overall:
1) Don't sweat the small stuff. The days are long gone when searching a hard drive for a 100 K file to delete is worthwhile.
2) Start small. A disk that full is going to be pretty touchy, so once you have identified a bloated folder, go inside of it and trash the smaller files and folder, then empty the trash, then delete a few more files, empty the trash, etc.
3) Don't forget to periodically Repair Permissions and restarting the computer.
4) If you are unsure about whether a folder or file can be safely deleted, ask someone knowledgable or just knock off for the day and hit it again tomorrow. Seriously, an unanswerable question you have might well be answered by sleeping on it and attacking it the next day.
5) As Douglas Adams wrote: DON'T PANIC!
Best of luck!
Chris

Having trouble with disc space on my 120G mac air. I back up to a separate my passport for mac disc, but my mac is also holding 40G worth of back up when i check what is using space. Why is this?

Having trouble with disc space on my 120G mac air. I back up to a separate " my passport for mac" disc , but my mac is also holding approx 40G of back ups as well when ive checked what is using space. Why is this?
Ive started running iphoto from the separate passport to save space,
and put all my music into the itunes match to save space as well
but it is still saying it is almost full because of the back ups!
I should of bought a bigger mac, but i need to make do at the moment, but it is hard when it constantly has only 10G or less space left.

When you use TimeMachine to back up a Mac notebook the local backups feature is automatically enabled. The local backup is just like a TimeMachine backup but it is done to the internal drive rather than an external. The important thing about local backups is that the feature is smart - as you need more drive space for your own data and applications, TimeMachine automatically culls the local backup to give you that needed space. So yes, it will look like you have very little drive space left and that the backup is 'robbing' you of needed GBs. But it really isn't.

Replace 2 old SANS with Storage Spaces?

We have two old HP SANs we want to replace before they fail.
All our hosts are Hyper-V and the VMs all Microsoft OSes.
We can replace them with equivalent SANs but I would like to ask you was to the comparison with a Storage Space solution: eliminating the rather idiosyncratic SAN management software etc..
CarolChi

Hi Carol,
Is there any specific question regarding this topic?
General speaking, Storage Space is somewhere similar to software RAID - you can create simple volume (RAID0), mirror volume (RAID1) or parity volume (RAID5). And there are some other options such as dual parity, 3-way mirror etc. You can manually confige
these options with PowerShell cmdlet so in order to manage Storage Space, you may need to realize related PowerShell cmdlet first.
And here is an article which introduced Storage Space:
Windows Server 2012 Storage Spaces: Is it for you? Could be…
http://blogs.technet.com/b/askpfeplat/archive/2012/10/10/windows-server-2012-storage-spaces-is-it-for-you-could-be.aspx
If you have any feedback on our support, please send to [email protected]

Problems with Storage Spaces

I have a storage space with 10 drives, with over 10GB of free disk space in the pool. Occasionally, certain of my spaces are inaccessible, presumably because two drives intermittently fail; these two drives total2.5g of physical space.
I have retired the two drives, but storage spaces will not let me remove them. When I click remove it says : "cant remove the drive from the pool", "drive could not be removed because not
all data could be reallocated. Add an additional drive to this pool and reattempt this operation".
How can I address this problem?

Hi,
According to Storage Space FAQ, you could find the reason:
Why do I have a low capacity warning even though I still have unused pool capacity?
Storage Spaces provides advance notification of thinly provisioned storage spaces when the storage pool does not have enough capacity spread among a sufficient number of disks to continue to write new data. The default warning point is 70% capacity utilization.
To learn when Storage Spaces will generate a warning, consider the following example.
A two column, two-way mirror space that uses thin provisioning in a four disk pool
Two of the disks have 1TB capacity and two have 2TB capacity. Because a two column, two-way mirror space needs four disks (number_of_disks = NumberOfColumns * NumberOfDataCopies), it will evenly consume all four disks as it writes new data. When capacity
utilization of the two 1TB disks reaches 70%, Storage Spaces will warn of a low capacity condition. Even though the entire pool has 3.2TB free capacity, the thinly provisioned space will soon not be able to write any more data because the 1TB disks are nearly
fully consumed.
You can easily keep individual storage spaces’ low capacity warning synchronized with each other and with the pool by following the guidance in the next section, “How do I increase pool capacity?” from the moment of creating the pool and through all
subsequent expansions of the pool.
For more details, please refer to the link below:
Storage Spaces Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ):
http://social.technet.microsoft.com/wiki/contents/articles/11382.storage-spaces-frequently-asked-questions-faq.aspx
Roger Lu
TechNet Community Support

Newbie Needs Helps With Storage Space

I just recently recieved an ipod for Christmas. My biggest problem is I have an old computer without a lot of space. How do I upload my CD collection without completely maxing out what left of my hard drive?? I don't have any nifty USB portable hard drives or anything. I guess the same question goes for all my downloaded music..
How can I just keep music on the ipod and not on my computer??

You need to manually manage your songs.
Here's how:
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=61148
VERY IMPORTANT:: Make sure your music is backed up to some other external media. CD, DVD, external HD, something! Especially your purchased music, if any.
Having your music only on your iPod is VERY RISKY. There may come a time when your iPod has trouble and will need to be restored. It may also get lost, stolen, dropped, etc. If you only have your music on your iPod and something happens to it... your music is gone.

Does anyone have trouble with the space bar yielding either an M or N? I am pretty careful by very frequently get this error. Anybody seen similar?

I am not the best typist but have tried going slowly. It seems the space bar is mis-aligned and when I try to add a space I get either and M or N. Very frustrating. Is there a way to recalibrate the screen to solve this problem?

are you connected to a wall charger while you are trying that?
sometimes when i connect to a wall charger, the callibration gets messed up, but when there is skin contact with the back, it goes away for some reason

Having trouble with storage.

My iPhone 4S keeps saying that I can't add anything to it because I don't have enough storage. So I deleted the apps that took up a lot of room, and I deleted almost every picture I had. It still says the storage is full and won't allow me to add anything. What do I do? Help please!

With the device connected to iTunes on your computer navigate to the Summary page for the device. What does iTunes say is using you storage?

Trouble with free space

This morning my finder said I has nearly 40gigs of free space, however - about an hour ago my drive genius dialogue opened to warn me that my start up disc was nearly full. Its now saying i have about 100mb left when i look on the finder, something has happened but i don't know what, i certainly haven't downloaded that much info since this morning. Also, if i keep an eye on the free space available it fluctuates without me doing anything. Does anybody know what is happening? Is it possible i d/loaded a virus?

can you share the resolution and reason?

Install Windows Server 2012 R2 VM on Storage Spaces with Storage Tiers

Hey guys
In my small/medium sized company we will soon update to Windows Server 2012 R2. I would like to implement virtual servers using Hyper-V. I didn't find a lot of information about Hyper-V in combination with storages spaces and autoamted storage tiers.
And this is very confusing to me as it seems to me that this would be the best practice as it is the most cost-efficient and most elegant solution.
My ideal scenario:
With Hyper-V I virtualize two Windows Server 2012 R2 instances. So two separate virtual machines.
I use the following disk setup:
1x cheap HDD 40GB for hyper-v server 2012 r2 core.
2x SSD 200GB (enterprise-grade)
2x HDD 4TB (7.2k, enterprise-grade)
Step 1:
I will install Hyper-V Server 2012 R2 Core on the 40GB HDD. Via command line, I will create a storage pool with automated tiered storage using the SSDs and the HDDs in mirrored mode the following way:
With Tiered Storage, I create a storage pool containing the SSDs and the HDDs. Then I create storage space A (1TB) and B (3.2TB) with the SSDs in a mirrored setup and the HDDs in a mirrored setup. The SSDs for the „hot files“ and the HDDs for the „cold files“.
Step2:
Ontop of the storage space A I want to install the first Windows Server 2012 R2 instance with Active directory. On storage space B I want to install the second Windows Server 2012 R2 instance for a business application to run on it.
Conclusion:
The SSDs are mirrored and therefore one SSD can fail.
The 4TB HDDs are mirrored and therefore one HDD can fail.
I have a fast and easy scalable environment.
But in the Internet I found many information that it’s not possible to install an operating system onto a storage tier.
Question 1:
Is this setup possible?
Question 2:
If this setup is possible, why is not everyone doing it?
Question 3:
Is it possible to do Step 1 over a GUI from a remote machine?
Question 4:
If the creation of Storage Tiers in the Hyper-V Server 2012 R2 is not possible. Would it work to use a Windows Server 2012 R2 as a parent system on the 40GB HDD? To do Step 1?
I would gladly get some feedback of people knowing Storage Tiers well.
Thanks a lot!

I would absolutely prefer a GUI. But a Windows Server 2012 R2 Standard Licence allows you to run two VM machines.
It also grants you a physical installation ("POSE" in the licensing documents). You can buy one copy of WS2012R2 Standard, install it on the hardware, enable Hyper-V, and then operate two virtual machines with WS2012R2 Standard ("VOSE"
in the licensing documents). The only restriction is that the management operating system (POSE) can only run services and applications meant to manage the virtual machines and/or the management operating system. The Hyper-V Server license is the same way
so it's not really any different.
In short, given the benefits of the GUI at your stage of learning, you have no solid reason not to install the full system and take advantage of it. You can disable the GUI later once you get your footing. Or not. Whatever suits you. However, in response
to your Question 3, you can do this all remotely. Once you get WS2012R2 installed in a guest, you can use it to manage the management operating system if you want. There are many options.
But then I would also need to have redundancy on the 40GB HDD as if this HDD brakes, all others brake as well?
Yes, you're going to want some redundancy for the management operating system. But, you've listed 5 drives in your original layout. You don't really have a 5-bay system, do you? Is there an empty sixth bay? Could you not get two 40 GB drives instead of one
and use hardware RAID-1?
Eric Siron
Altaro Hyper-V Blog
I am an independent blog contributor, not an Altaro employee. I am solely responsible for the content of my posts.

How to design Storage Spaces with a large number of drives

I am wondering how one might go about designing a storage space for a large number of drives. Specifically I've got 45 x 4TB drives. As i am not extremely familiar with storage spaces, i'm a bit confused as to how I should go about designing this. Here is
how i would do it in hardware raid and i'd like to know how to best match this setup in Storage Spaces. I've been burned twice now by poorly designed storage spaces and i don't want to get burned again. I want to make sure if a drive fails, i'm able to properly
replace it without SS tossing it's cookies.
In the hardware raid world, i would divide these 45 x 4TB drives into three separate 15 disk Raid 6's. (Thus losing 6 drives to parity) Each raid 6 would show up as a separate volume/drive to the parent
OS. If any disk failed in any of the three raids, i would simply pull it out and put a new disk back in and the raid would rebuild itself.
Here is my best guess for storage spaces. I would create 3 separate storage pools each containing 15 disks. I would then create a separate
Dual Parity Virtual Disk for each pool. (Also losing 6 drives to parity) Each virtual disk would appear as a separate volume/disk
to the parent OS. Did i miss anything?
Additionally, is there any benefit to breaking up my 45 disks into 3 separate pools? Would it be better to create one giant pool with all 45 disks and then create 3 (or however many) virtual disks on top of that one pool?

I am wondering how one might go about designing a storage space for a large number of drives. Specifically I've got 45 x 4TB drives. As i am not extremely familiar with storage spaces, i'm a bit confused as to how I should go about designing this. Here is
how i would do it in hardware raid and i'd like to know how to best match this setup in Storage Spaces. I've been burned twice now by poorly designed storage spaces and i don't want to get burned again. I want to make sure if a drive fails, i'm able to properly
replace it without SS tossing it's cookies.
In the hardware raid world, i would divide these 45 x 4TB drives into three separate 15 disk Raid 6's. (Thus losing 6 drives to parity) Each raid 6 would show up as a separate volume/drive to the parent
OS. If any disk failed in any of the three raids, i would simply pull it out and put a new disk back in and the raid would rebuild itself.
Here is my best guess for storage spaces. I would create 3 separate storage pools each containing 15 disks. I would then create a separate
Dual Parity Virtual Disk for each pool. (Also losing 6 drives to parity) Each virtual disk would appear as a separate volume/disk
to the parent OS. Did i miss anything?
Additionally, is there any benefit to breaking up my 45 disks into 3 separate pools? Would it be better to create one giant pool with all 45 disks and then create 3 (or however many) virtual disks on top of that one pool?
1) Try to avoid parity and esp. double parity RAIDs with a typical VM workload. It's dominated by small reads (OK) and small writes (not OK as whole parity stripe gets updated with any "ready-modify-write" sequence). As a result writes would be DOG slow.
Another nasty parity RAID characteristic is very long rebuild times... It's pretty easy to get second (third with double parity) drive failure during re-build process and that would render the whole RAID set useless. Solution would be to use RAID10. Much safer,
faster to work and rebuild compared to RAID5/6 but wastes half of raw capacity...
2) Creating "islands" of storage is an extremely effective way of stealing IOPS away from your config. Typical modern RAID set would run out of IOPS long before running out of capacity so unless you're planning to have a file dump of an ice cold data or
CCTV storage you'll absolutely need all IOPS from all spindles @ the same time. This again means One Big RAID10, OBR10.
Hope this helped a bit :) Good luck!
StarWind VSAN [Virtual SAN] clusters Hyper-V without SAS, Fibre Channel, SMB 3.0 or iSCSI, uses Ethernet to mirror internally mounted SATA disks between hosts.

Tiered Storage Spaces with LSI RAID Controller 9260-8i (no JBOD) - Performance Drop

Hello
I have a Lab-Server with a LSI-Raid-Controller 9260-8i and 2x 256GB SSDs / 6x 600GB HDDs. First I configured the LSI-Raid-Controller with a RAID 1 (2x 600GB HDD) and installed
Windows Server 2012 R2 with Hyper-V Role on this RAID 1. This works just fine. Then I configured the LSI-Raid-Controller with additional 6x "Raid 0 Drive Groups" where each Drive Group has one single physical drive
in it. And then I created 6 virtual drives out of these 6 Drive Groups. So far so good: my Windows Server 2012 R2 now sees 6 new Harddrives (4x 600GB HDD and 2x 256GB SSD). I then created a Storage Pool out of these 6 drives (with PowerShell /
assign MediaType SSD/HDD) and on top of the Storage Pool a "Tiered Storage Space" with Mirror Layout (2x 256GB SSDs mirrored and 2x2x 600GBs HDD mirrored). This gives me a Tiered Storage Space of about 1.3TB. On this Storage
Space I created a Virtual Drive of 1.3TB capacity. Success!! It seems to work fine.... Even I do not have a Storage-Controller supporting JBOD directly, I was able to create a Tiered Storage Space!!
Now where's the problem? Fine-Tuning the LSI-Raid-Controller Settings and the resulting
Disk Performance....
1) LSI-Raid-Controller: Virtual Drive Properties: What should I choose? Read Policy (Ahead or no) / Write Policy (Write Back with BBU or Write Through) / IO Policy (Direct IO or cached IO) / Disk Cache Policy (enable or disabled or unchanged)
/ Stripe Size (256 KB or ??). Do these settings conflict with the Windows Server Storage Space Layout?
2) Windows Server Disk Management (under "Disk XY"): Write Cache Policy? (activate Write Cache on this Device)
3) Windows Server Device Manager (under "Drives" - Microsoft Storage Space Device): Write Cache Policy? (activate Write Cache on this Device)
4) Performance - Results with Crystal Disk Mark: the inital Results after setting up the Storage were quite good (Seq R: 550 MB/s and W: 590 MB/s // 512K R: 490MB/s and W: 618 MB/s // 4K R: 18MB/s and W: 37 MB/s // 4KQD32
R:270 MB/s and W:37 MB/S) But 2 months later the values dropped to: Seq R: 290 MB/s and W: 170 MB/s // 512K R: 120MB/s and W: 239 MB/s // 4K R: 1.5MB/s and W: 31 MB/s // 4KQD32 R: 9 MB/s and W: 71 MB/S). Huge loss of performance
- SSD full?
5) Since this is a Hyper-V Server I put some VMs on it. The Performance within the VMs has also dropped accordingly. Are there any
best practices when placing VHDX-Files on a Tired Storage Space? I could of course assign one or two VHDX-Files directly to the SSD Tier, but actually I don't want that because that would use too much SSD-Space.
Any Experts on this Subject?
Mark

Hi Mark,
For the settings of the Raid Controller, it is better to confirm with manufacturer for detailed information. As you said these settings will affect with storage space settings.
From the description you set the 6 disks as 6 RAID0 groups. Is it supported to leave these disks as JBOD and directly add them into a storage space? If Raid settings will affect storage space performance, this could help us avoiding the RAID settings.
As data is already written onto the virtual disk, we may not available to recreate it. You could have a try with following PowerShell cmdlet to see if it will work better after optimize.
Optimize-Volume -DriveLetter X -TierOptimize
If you have any feedback on our support, please send to [email protected]

Columns in a 2way Mirror Storage Space

Hi
I have a similar question like J_Rod: http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/7a37e6ed-7e22-485c-a5d1-6460b2c4d63b/mimicing-raid-10-resiliency-with-storage-spaces?forum=windowsserverpreview
Why should I consider using more than 2 Columns in a 2 way mirror Storage Space? For me it makes little difference between a Storage Space with a 2 Column 2 Way Mirroring and a 6 Column 2 Way Mirroring on a 12 Disk Storage Pool (like in the Picture).
Apart from:
big write/reads which are processed by 6 disk in the 6 column configuration instead of 2 in the 2 column configuration
Filling of the disk is not synchron over all disk with the 2 column configuration
therefor i get exactly what I expect of the Storage Space when I use the 2 column configuration and try to achieve the same Result as a classic RAID10 (RAID 0 over X RAID1)

So when I create a 2 Column Mirror Storage Space can I be certain sure that I will have a disk configuration like:
Disk1 -- Disk2 -- Disk3 -- Disk4 -- Disk5 -- Disk6
Data1 -- Data1 - Data2 -- Data2 - Data3 -- Data3
So I could loose disk 1,3 and 5?
Or is there some other Magic in Storage Spaces?

Storage Space 2012 R2 CPU / Memory requirement

How much impact would does CPU core density has with Storage Space 2012 R2? Given the option of dual socket 5500 series quad core vs dual socket 5600 series hex core for a SMB environment (attach up to maximum of 2 x 24 JBOD), would there be any
significant performance improvement? Dedup feature would be enable, at least on some virtual disk, along with SSD storage tiering.

How much impact would does CPU core density has with Storage Space 2012 R2? Given the option of dual socket 5500 series quad core vs dual socket 5600 series hex core for a SMB environment (attach up to maximum of 2 x 24 JBOD), would there
be any significant performance improvement? Dedup feature would be enable, at least on some virtual disk, along with SSD storage tiering.
Try running Performance Monitor on a Scale-Out File Server and you'll see CPU and memory usage (unless CSV cache is enabled) is pretty sparse. Dedupe does not matter at all as optimization process kicks in only when there's no I/O (CPU is not used for anything
either way).
P.S. That's one of the reasons why I personally don't buy approach of scaling CPU (Hyper-V) and storage (SoFS) layers separately from each other.
StarWind Virtual SAN clusters Hyper-V without SAS, Fibre Channel, SMB 3.0 or iSCSI, uses Ethernet to mirror internally mounted SATA disks between hosts.

Trouble with Storage space.

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for