Windows 7 as OS for home server?

[Modelworks]

I would not use win7 as the OS using it as a server running an atom 1.6ghz cpu. Win7 can run pretty good with less resources than vista, but not if you are going to use it as a server too, it may work but don't expect great performance.

Something to consider about streaming media is that DLNA and media sharing is going to be big this year. Samba is quickly losing support in the media player market due to the difficulty users are having in setting up networks to work correctly. They want plug and play of file sharing and DLNA gives them that. DLNA requires that your server transcode content to a format the device can understand if it cannot use the original file. An atom cpu may be able to transcode but transcode, file serve and keep up I doubt it. The throughput on the boards is just not that great. I would install as minimal an OS as possible.

For me that would be linux based and will outperform WHS by a long long way.

 

[ViRGE]

Who said anything about single drives? My tests were RAID to RAID, and moreover, when I say WHS can have great write performance, I mean great write performance when it's configured using great drives or using a RAID array, as I've done and measured.

BTW, if you can get that sort of buffered speed, you help make my point -- if you take care of the drive speed (as you must if want to get the max speed over gigabit) by RAID or some other means, then as you show, the system has the capability to give great performance. Now all you have to do is to take care of the drives, and update the server OS if you want as good speed on pulls -- have you also experienced the push/pull asymmetry which I mention?

Alright, you didn't mention RAID so I didn't consider it. RAID isn't something you're supposed to be using with WHS anyhow.

Otherwise your results are identical to what I see when uploading files from a Vista/7 box to WHS; greater-than-drive speeds until the WHS box runs out of memory to buffer the transfer. Are you sure that's the right chart BTW? It says Vista as the Server OS and varying the client OS, while you've implied it represents the other way around.

And I can't say I've seen a push/pull difference, besides obvious cases of pre-fetching on either end.

 

[RebateMonger]

A couple of things we haven't discussed so far may also be important in the choice of an OS:

1) How much data on the file server?
2) How many PCs to back up, and how much data on those?
3) How much time and money can be devoted to a solution?
4) What are the client PCs?

If there's only one PC that needs to be backed up, and if there's 100 GB of data, that's different from ten PCs to be backed up and 10 Terabytes of data.

 

[Madwand1]

Are you sure that's the right chart BTW? It says Vista as the Server OS and varying the client OS, while you've implied it represents the other way around.

No, I wrote up front that the chart was in the opposite direction from the OP's needs. I have done many tests in the other direction, but did not then do / record them in the same manner with identical hardware varying just the OS.

 

[Fjodor2001]

RebateMonger: In my case:

1. 4 TB.
2. Probably 2 PCs. ~40-80 GB to back up on each PC. (Also, there will be ~50-100 GB data on the server that should be backed up.)
3. For initial set up and configuration, perhaps a couple of days. Once set up, I don't intend it to require much maintenance.
4. Windows 7 PCs. Core 2 Duo & Core i3-530 based systems.

 

[Fjodor2001]

Some more questions that have popped up:

a) Is there any third party software for Windows 7 that is able to aggregate several physical drives into one logical disk, in a similar manner as WHS does (i.e. the Drive Extender technology)? Note that it doesn't have to work *exactly* as the WHS solution does.

b) How does WHS Drive Extender technology store the data on the drives? Are the physical drives formatted in standard NTFS format, and then the physical drives contain the same folder structure as for the single logical disk that is exposed by WHS? Or is some WHS-proprietary solution used?

c) WHS has a system for backing up client computers, which is said to be very easy to use. Is there any third party server software for Windows 7 that is as good as (or better than) the WHS solution?

Thanks!

 

[ViRGE]

Some more questions that have popped up:

a) Is there any third party software for Windows 7 that is able to aggregate several physical drives into one logical disk, in a similar manner as WHS does (i.e. the Drive Extender technology)? Note that it doesn't have to work *exactly* as the WHS solution does.

b) How does WHS Drive Extender technology store the data on the drives? Are the physical drives formatted in standard NTFS format, and then the physical drives contain the same folder structure as for the single logical disk that is exposed by WHS? Or is some WHS-proprietary solution used?

c) WHS has a system for backing up client computers, which is said to be very easy to use. Is there any third party server software for Windows 7 that is as good as (or better than) the WHS solution?

Thanks!

a) Yes. Google "disk spanning" and JBOD.

b) It's exactly as you describe. Each drive is NTFS formatted and uses the same folder structure.

c) Sure, there are things like Retrospect. They all cost an arm and a leg though; WHS is ridiculously cheap in terms of per-computer costs once you get up to several computers.

 

[RebateMonger]

a) Is there any third party software for Windows 7 that is able to aggregate several physical drives into one logical disk, in a similar manner as WHS does (i.e. the Drive Extender technology)? Note that it doesn't have to work *exactly* as the WHS solution does.

I don't know of any, but I haven't really looked. There are some Linux programs that can create storage pools like WHS, but that's Linux, not Win7. In Windows, you can do "Volume Mount Points" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volume_Mount_Point ,
but it's not nearly as convenient and still requires planning how you are going to use your disk space. With a storage pool, you just add files and the OS manages the space.
Edit:
Virge's post reminds me that I didn't mention disk spanning. If you do spanning, make sure you know what will happen if any of the spanned disks fails. With Windows software spanning, for instance, the entire spanned array fails and you'll need to rebuild it from scratch

b) How does WHS Drive Extender technology store the data on the drives? Are the physical drives formatted in standard NTFS format, and then the physical drives contain the same folder structure as for the single logical disk that is exposed by WHS? Or is some WHS-proprietary solution used?

WHS formats all its drives as standard MBR-based disks with standard NTFS format. The "real" shared folder structure on the disks looks like the structure of the single logical disk exposed by WHS.

c) WHS has a system for backing up client computers, which is said to be very easy to use. Is there any third party server software for Windows 7 that is as good as (or better than) the WHS solution?

There's lots of backup programs out there. I don't know of any backup "server" software other than the server programs from Acronis, Symantec and such. Those are quite expensive.

You'd be looking for backup programs for your Windows clients that can (hopefully) do image backups and can manage archival backups without filling up your server's hard drive. Bonus points if it keeps a copy of all your PCs' old and new drivers in one place.

 

[nerp]

The beauty of WHS's drive extender is that if the system dies, your data is still stored in normal NTFS folders and can be accessed by any computer. Unlike most other options, which renders multiple drives scrambled and unusable in the event of a failure. Further, WHS makes it painfully easy to mirror only folders that you want so data that can easily be replaced or downloaded again can be seperated from absolutley critical stuff which means more storage space in the long run.

Trust me, I held off running WHS for a while for a variety of reasons. Now that I've finally gone ahead and bought and installed it, I can't imagine fussing around with some client box and third party programs or any other potentially tedious solution. WHS just works right. And I promise you'll discover features that will prove invaluable to you once you're running it that haven't crossed your mind yet. For me, the remote access capabilites and the ability to manage my entire home network from anywhere without having to deal with any remote access software is absolutley fantastic.

 

[Fjodor2001]

Yes, it does indeed sound convinient!

I have some more questions by the way:

1. In WHS, is it possible to access the files & folders on the disks using the regular Windows Explorer on the server? Or is it only possible to access the disks using "Windows Home Server Console->Shared Folders" (see http://mobile.osnews.com/img/18090/shares.png)?

2. Are there any restrictions to what Windows software can be installed or run on WHS? Or will anything that runs on Windows Server 2003 run ok?

3. What hardware do you think is suitable for the server? Will an Atom D510 / 2 GB RAM do, or would a Core i3-530 / 4 GB RAM be a better choice? FYI: I intend to use it as a file server, for media streaming to a HTPC (no transcoding!), for backup, and for some minor background tasks such as torrent downloads.

 

[RebateMonger]

1. In WHS, is it possible to access the files & folders on the disks using the regular Windows Explorer on the server? Or is it only possible to access the disks using "Windows Home Server Console->Shared Folders" (see http://mobile.osnews.com/img/18090/shares.png)?

Shared data is accessed via standard network shares (\\whsname\music , etc.). Doing it that way ensures that you won't interfere with the Drive Extender's operation.

2. Are there any restrictions to what Windows software can be installed or run on WHS? Or will anything that runs on Windows Server 2003 run ok?

Most software that will run on Server 2003 will run on WHS. You just don't want to go around the Drive Extender.

3. What hardware do you think is suitable for the server? Will an Atom D510 / 2 GB RAM do, or would a Core i3-530 / 4 GB RAM be a better choice? FYI: I intend to use it as a file server, for media streaming to a HTPC (no transcoding!), for backup, and for some minor background tasks such as torrent downloads.

Most WHS servers in people's homes and offices are pre-built ones running on Celerons with 512 MB of memory. The most recent pre-built ones run on Atoms with up to 2 GB of memory. I've never had more than 512 MB in any of the boxes I've worked with, but mine are only used for backups and occasional file servers and media servers.

 

[Fjodor2001]

Shared data is accessed via standard network shares (\\whsname\music , etc.). Doing it that way ensures that you won't interfere with the Drive Extender's operation.

Thanks! I suppose that's the way it works when accessing the data on the WHS server from a client? But does it also work that way when accessing the data on the disks locally from the server? Or is it still possible to run Windows Explorer on the server, and access the data on the local physical disks? Or is that inhibited by WHS in some way to protect the user for making undeliberate mistakes that could put the Drive Extender's operation in an inconsistent state?

Finally, I've seen some people request "Full integration of Windows Media Center" for WHS 2010. I'm not sure what they mean by this, but perhaps someone knows what it could mean?

 

[tdawg]

Just an FYI, from personal experience, you can add a hard drive full of data to an existing WHS without formatting it. The OS will only want to format it if you explicitely instruct the OS to add the newly-installed hard drive to the overall server storage matrix, rather than keeping it as it's own drive. I didn't try using the drive separately, as I just transferred files to the existing storage space on the server, and then instructed the OS to add this second hard drive to the system to expand the overall monitored storage space.

 

[ViRGE]

Thanks! I suppose that's the way it works when accessing the data on the WHS server from a client? But does it also work that way when accessing the data on the disks locally from the server? Or is it still possible to run Windows Explorer on the server, and access the data on the local physical disks? Or is that inhibited by WHS in some way to protect the user for making undeliberate mistakes that could put the Drive Extender's operation in an inconsistent state?

WHS has a regular desktop that technically speaking MS discourages you from accessing, but otherwise works just like WinServer 2K3 both in terms of local access and RDP. The WHS Console is just an application that runs on the server in a custom RDP session that hides the desktop.

Anyhow, if you're at the desktop of WHS, then you can access your data through the shares just like any client OS does over the network.*

Finally, I've seen some people request "Full integration of Windows Media Center" for WHS 2010. I'm not sure what they mean by this, but perhaps someone knows what it could mean?

Right now if you want to use both Windows Media Center and WHS, you basically need 2 boxes. Devices that operate in WMC Extender mode (mainly the Xbox 360) need WMC to serve up files and TV streams to them. Since WHS doesn't have WMC, it can't record TV or serve up any media files to devices that operate in WMC Extender mode.

Instead you're limited to serving up media via SMB shares and its limited DLNA support. Basically what people want to do is combine WMC's TV recording abilities with WHS, so that they can build one box with drives and tuners for WHS, and then have WHS serve up the TV streams to other computers and Xboxes in their house.

* To get really technical all the shares are actually mapped to the D drive (with drive extender intercepting all operations to the D drive), but you really shouldn't access anything that way.

 

[Fjodor2001]

WHS has a regular desktop that technically speaking MS discourages you from accessing, but otherwise works just like WinServer 2K3 both in terms of local access and RDP. The WHS Console is just an application that runs on the server in a custom RDP session that hides the desktop.

How come all add-on functionality is developed as plug-ins to the WHS console? Will it impose any problems installing regular Windows services/applications outside of the console? If so, wouldn't you say that limits the extendability of the WHS solution?

Anyhow, if you're at the desktop of WHS, then you can access your data through the shares just like any client OS does over the network.*

Ok, but let's say you have 3 hard drives on the WHS server, then there is no way to access them directly using their 'drive letters' (e.g. C, D, and E) as on regular Windows versions, right?

 

[Raduque]

How come all add-on functionality is developed as plug-ins to the WHS console? Will it impose any problems installing regular Windows services/applications outside of the console? If so, wouldn't you say that limits the extendability of the WHS solution?

Your primary interaction is done through the WHS console. Services can be installed (and some console add-ins do install services), but in general there's no reason to install extra services. Most of the functionality you want from add-ins can be done through the drive extender service.

Ok, but let's say you have 3 hard drives on the WHS server, then there is no way to access them directly using their 'drive letters' (e.g. C, D, and E) as on regular Windows versions, right?

This is correct. The drives are formatted and "hidden" they are assigned drive letters, but the drive extender service cloaks them as the D drive and redirects files and filesystem calls to each drive as needed. If you mess with the drive by giving it a drive letter you WILL break something. I speak from experience (in my case, the drive disappeared from the pool and WHS freaked out about it).

 

[ViRGE]

Your primary interaction is done through the WHS console. Services can be installed (and some console add-ins do install services), but in general there's no reason to install extra services. Most of the functionality you want from add-ins can be done through the drive extender service.

Exactly. Officially you're only supposed to add functionality via add-ons; you're not supposed to see or touch the OS below the console. However with RDP you can access the desktop and install whatever you need. My WHS box runs MySQL Server and some Java applications, for example.

 

[JackMDS]

This is a screenshot of WHS installed on 939 Mobo with Opteron 148 + 1.5GB RAM and two 1TB drives.
It sits with few other Network computers on a KVM so it can be accessed as any other computer is accessed at the desktop.
It is an experimental project that I am engaged in; it is configured as sort of Combo “NAS/Workstation”. Redundancy, and Scheduled Backup are Deliberately Off. Network Backups are stored on the WHS in form of saved tib files that are generated by TrueImage that is on the Networked computers.

When working directly on the OS many of the regular capacities of Windows and a lot of software work OK including Shared Folders, shared individual drives, Mapped drives, and more.

It is a tricky way to work because there are few operations that if mistakenly used, can trash the system.

Thus No point to try unless One is willing to put time to understand well how WHS works.
It really works great for what I need it for it is the most stable OS I ever worked with.

 

[RebateMonger]

Finally, I've seen some people request "Full integration of Windows Media Center" for WHS 2010. I'm not sure what they mean by this, but perhaps someone knows what it could mean?

They are talking about making WHS an "all-in-one media server/player". This means installing a TV tuner, a video card, and hooking WHS up directly to a TV.

Personally, I think it's a bad idea. It means that users will be logging into WHS and doing things like installing programs and browsing the Internet. Having humans logging into file servers and backup servers and browsing the Internet is a really bad idea.

It also means that the WHS server that used to run on a P3 with 512 MB of memory and no video card now requires a high-performance processor, more memory, and a pricey video card.

I prefer the "cheap file server appliance" approach, running on a low-power PC, with near-zero human interaction.. Leave the Media Center stuff (TV tuners, transcoding, etc.) to a desktop OS, where if something goes wrong it doesn't wipe out your server.

 

[Raduque]

They are talking about making WHS an "all-in-one media server/player". This means installing a TV tuner, a video card, and hooking WHS up directly to a TV.

Personally, I think it's a bad idea. It means that users will be logging into WHS and doing things like installing programs and browsing the Internet. Having humans logging into file servers and backup servers and browsing the Internet is a really bad idea.

It also means that the WHS server that used to run on a P3 with 512 MB of memory and no video card now requires a high-performance processor, more memory, and a pricey video card.

I prefer the "cheap file server appliance" approach, running on a low-power PC, with near-zero human interaction.. Leave the Media Center stuff (TV tuners, transcoding, etc.) to a desktop OS, where if something goes wrong it doesn't wipe out your server.

Agreed, with all of this. The better way to do it would be to figure out how to efficiently record TO the WHS, that way the MCE client can be a box that just has tuners and GbE. They also need to change the DRM restrictions so that each MCE client can playback each others recorded content, though the content providers have a massive telephone pole up their ass when it comes to multiple devices.

 

[RebateMonger]

Agreed, with all of this. The better way to do it would be to figure out how to efficiently record TO the WHS, that way the MCE client can be a box that just has tuners and GbE.

I've used WHS PP3 with a Win7 client and it pretty much works like that. Recordings end up automatically on WHS server and they show up in the Win7 media libaries. You can also automatically create a recoded .WMV version of the recordings for Windows Mobile and Zune. This, too, is put on the WHS.

I don't know how the Copy Protection issues for encrypted programs are going to end up. Probably not well....

 

[notposting]

I actually mentioned this on TheGreenButton. It boils down to whether people want the WHS to also run MC, or just integrate more tightly (or what I think would be very slick, a remote only version of 7MC for Extenders only). Along with some integrated web-based guide/recording, a universal household guide (so if you hit record upstairs it will show that it's set to record in the living room also, etc). I would prefer some tight integration to help bring it all together.

Fjodor, you might want to consider virtualization--get something with some more horsepower and run esxi or hyper-v and put WHS in that. This also lets you add other specific OS's while keeping your WHS separate (and safe). There's some info out there if you google it, I'm considering trying it this summer. The thing to look for is ensuring that your data won't be fubared if something goes out. I've been looking into the drive pass-through options and it seems to be the way to get the best of both worlds. Gives you that flexibility going forward...

 

[Raduque]

. The thing to look for is ensuring that your data won't be fubared if something goes out. I've been looking into the drive pass-through options and it seems to be the way to get the best of both worlds. Gives you that flexibility going forward...

WHS HDDs are standard NTFS drives - just toss one in another PC or external box if you have problems and all your files are in the "DE" folder in the root.

 

[JackMDS]

After all of the hard work, want a Free WHS Sticker? :biggrin:

http://windowsteamblog.com/blogs/wi...8/how-do-i-love-thee-windows-home-server.aspx

.

 

[Fjodor2001]

Some more questions before I order my WHS sticker... :awe:

1. How does the Volume Shadow Copy service work with WHS? Does it only work when backing up client computers? Or can you select folders on the WHS server that should use Volume Shadow Copy? And if so, does that mean that you can recover files backwards in time, e.g. if you have deleted or modified a file a couple of days ago (i.e. similar to the Time Machine functionality on Mac, or rsync on Linux)?

2. Is the Volume Shadow Copy service considered to be stable currently? I've ready on some places on the Internet that Microsoft has recommended not to enabled it due to instability issues?

3. If WHS does not support the functionality in 1, is there some WHS console add-on that provides such functionality?

Thanks!