Windows Home Server RC1 Review

Nocturnal

Lifer
Jan 8, 2002
18,927
0
76
Originally posted by: BlueWeasel
70GB minimum hard drive space?

The entire fuction of this is being a home "server" which can backup your data. If you have a normal sized hard drive, say 120 - 500GB for your main drive, you'll be surprised that your backup won't be done with 40GB in your home server. It's essential to have the necessary storage space in order for it to do its job.
 

mechBgon

Super Moderator<br>Elite Member
Oct 31, 1999
30,699
1
0
Since this is an Operating Systems topic, it is being moved from Windows/PC Software to Operating Systems.

AnandTech Moderator
mechBgon
 

Trashman

Platinum Member
Jan 31, 2000
2,040
0
0
In case there is any interest, probably old news for most, just read that Windows Home Server software will be available as a stand alone product, read article in MaximumPC, august 07.
Just thought i'd throw that out, i recall this question being asked in threads reviewing WHS, so now we know that it will.



 

BD2003

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
16,815
1
81
WHS is great stuff, and it's backup has indeed saved my ass, but I still have a few peeves with it.

The disk balancing makes it simple to use, but it doesnt perform nearly as well as it should, since everything going to the other disks has to bounce off of the main disk first - which is part of the reason why you need 70gb free space.

And it insists on running chkdsk every 6 hours to make sure discs arent failing (console says its balancing during this time). Thats incredibly excessive, and since WHS doesnt have I/O prioritization, definitely slows you down. It takes quite a while to chkdsk 500gb of data. If anything, that kind of excessive disk thrashing is going to be the factor that will lead the drives to fail in the first place...

Downloading torrents directly to the shared folders often leaves them corrupted. Its probably just a bug, but torrents read and write all over a file, and since the server balances as files are being written, it gets all confused. I ended up tossing another spare drive in there to use as temporary storage that exists outside of the main storage cluster. If you had an option to use more than 20gb for the OS partition, you could always put it there instead of another drive.

As much as you'd like to believe those folder shares are transparent to the OS, theyre not. WMP11 would refuse to see files stored on it, it wanted to use the "media sharing" garbage. I gave itunes a try, but that wouldnt work until I mapped the share to a network drive. And while it worked, it was agonizingly slow - no matter how fast the HDs are, its bottlenecked by the ethernet connection - it took about 8 hours to add 50gb of music to the library, and general navigation was just horrendously slow...itunes would even temporarily freeze when it finished downloading a podcast.

Restoring from a backup takes FOREVER...but it works.
 

Double Trouble

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
9,270
103
106
I'm surprised there isn't more buzz about this particular product. Many (if not most) households now have more than one PC, and keeping backups current and making sure the backups work etc is a big hassle. I'd like to get my hands on it and mess with it a little, but I can't seem to find it yet......
 

nerp

Diamond Member
Dec 31, 2005
9,865
105
106
I think the buzz will come when the devices hit retail and the marketing push hits the airwaves. I'm excited to build my own WHS box with spare parts and with the ridiculously low prices for 500GB drives, I'm gonna stick 3 or 4 of them in there and finally have worksations that are nothing but workstations. I am also interested in the snap-ins that will be available.

Nice that MS is leaving the system open. Already, there's a utorrent snap in and you can even run printer sharing off of it. There should be all sorts of interesting snap-ins coming out as time goes on.
 

obeseotron

Golden Member
Oct 9, 1999
1,910
0
0
Does anyone know if WHS' duplicate folders option uses a method based on parity (RAID5-ish) or just simple duplication (RAID1-ish)? Obviously there would be a performance hit with parity, but you end up losing a lot less space. The drobo for instance uses a parity based system, though a much more intelligent one than RAID5.