License Disk Size

[Kaskuser Kiss]

Sowhat this means for deduplicated jobs is that an original job that protected all of the application data on a client was written to disk. Then subsequent jobs do not write this data again to the disk, which is the principle of deduplication only write data once.

So, even though that original job may have qualified for aging, because subsequent jobs refer to this original data, it is still retained. Removing this data would invalidate all the jobs that ran later.

I've had a disk failure on my ReadyNAS NV+ V2 today. It has 3 x 2TB disks at the moment with the disk in slot #3 having failed. I want to replace it with a higher capacity disk, but I'm unsure of what the maximum size disk my NAS can support. I've seen some posts mentioning people using 4TB disks, but the maximum volume capacity is 12TB, so I'm assuming I can have 4 x 4 TB, but 4TB of that will be used for storing parity information hence the 12 TB usable volume.

Also I'd appreciate any tips on the best way to go about upgrading. I plan to replace the failed drive with a 4TB drive and also fill the empty slot with another 4TB drive. Slots 1 and 2 will retain their current 2TB drives.

No, it's not. Generally Netgear's datasheets use the largest size compatible disks when computing the capacity, and they don't revise the datasheets as larger disks become available. Back in 2011 when the NV+ v2 was launched, the largest disks available were 3 TB (giving you the 12 TB volume size).

Many desktop drives (and unfortunately some NAS-purposed models) have shifted to SMR technology - which isn't a great choice for RAID. I recommend either Seagate Ironwolf modes or WD EFRX models in the 2-6 TB size range. Avoid the newer WD EFAX drives in this size range - they are all SMR.

Another option is to fully expand your NAS volume now by going with two 8 TB drives. That would cost about $400 USD. If you want to go with the full 16 TB later, you'd then just need to get one more 8 TB (and do a factory reset with just those three drives in place). WD EFAX and Seagate Ironwolf are both good choices in this size range.

One other aspect to consider is the age of your NAS. Netgear stopped manufacturing them in 2013, and no longer provide firmware updates. It doesn't support SMB 3, and the version of TLS used to reach the web dashboard is also in the process of being deprecated by the browser community. So you should be thinking about when to replace it. A current ReadyNAS wouldn't have these limitations (and also has no known limits to volume size). It also has higher performance and some additional features.

However, if you plan to use 2x2TB and 2x4TB volume capacity will be limited by the smallest disk. For example, if you are installing one 250GB drive and three 750GB drives, your data volume capacity will be limited to 250GB on each of the four disks. In Flex-RAID mode, you can utilize the leftover space on the 3 750GB disks by creating another data volume (3 x 500GB). With X-RAID, if you replace the single 250GB disk with a 750GB disk, your capacity will automatically expand, utilizing all 750 GB from each of the 4 disks.

And while I do want to upgrade to a newer NAS (especially as the throughput on the NV+ V2 is so ridiculously slow due to the limited RAM available) there are way too many other things that are more important for me to be spending money on right now so I can't just yet unfortunately.

I just downloaded TreeSize Free and am most impressed with how much you have built into the free version of your software. It is clearly a well engineered and carefully thought out product that will be very useful for finding clutter on my hard drive. It contains far more value than I expected, and I compliment you on a product well done.

I was using Treesize to manage the space on my drive after having installed the Android devkit, which resulted in my system downloading about half-a-dozen versions of the SDK, along with about six thousand version of Java!! Absolute bloomin' chaos.

Thanks for Treesize. I haven't had to use it for about a decade, but it's good to know it's still around, and works as wonderfully well as it every did.

A life saver!!

Get detailed statistics on file types and file owners. A Top 100 list shows the largest files at a glance. Compare with previous states and see the size increases. Additional bar and pie charts give more insight.

Export all collected data, statistics and charts into various formats. Create a stunning PDF report or export to an Excel document for further processing or calculations.

Hello All, Hope everyone is doing good in covid time. I have came across one interesting problem. We want to build a vi which will return us available size of C drive D drive and E drive on any computer.(Naming of drives are given as example).

Man instead of making fun of me try helping. We do not have full development version of labview accessible to us. We get hardly 1 hr to use labview in our institute. Thanks for your reply anyways. This vi returns size of only 1 disk.

I recall reading (A LONG TIME AGO) some remarks that Linux would work better on a drive with 40% or more of free space.

Maybe the values are different but the more free space, the better. (NOT on a 1Tb disk, of course)

I have no problems with 3TB disks and 4TB disks in the cold swap bays, instead of an optical drive or on the eSATA port under Linux. Although reportedly you need UEFI to boot from 4TB disks, I boot from usb so can't confirm.

I am running 4 x 4 TB hard drives using Windows 2012r2 Server Raid for many years. Even so I am getting low on space and ready to upgrade to 4 x 8TB. Are there any size limits built into the server BIOS/hardware/firmware etc.? Somewhere HP must have a number written down. I see others have success with 6 TB drives. Today max size drives go way up from there.

I don't know if it is possible but ... Is there software that can determine architectural limits for disk size for a particular motherboard? Maximum disk sizes keep growing and show no signs of slowing down any time soon so there is a need for this, I believe.

NetApp have expanded an aggregate which was previously solely 900GB disks with 1800GB disks, resulting in an aggregate with mixed disk sizes. This approach is alien to me and even though a new feature in ONTAP allow mixed disks in an aggregate to maintain their useable capacity I was still under the impression that mixed disk aggreates were to be avoided and best practice was an aggregate with a single disk-type (excluding hybrid aggs).

The advantage I suppose is the spindle count, however to my mind this will only be effective up to the point where the smaller disks become full upon which the RAID groups which contain the larger disks will start getting hot. Unless there is some sort of automatic/manual re-balancing (reallocate). Part of the issue I have is that how the mixed disk aggregates function doesn't seem to be documented, or at least I can't find it.

As was previously pointed out, you aren't losing any capacity in this setup. The only time you lose disk capacity from multiple sizes is when multiple sizes are forced together in a raidgroup. This can happen on creation (generally accidentally) or when a larger size disk is pressed into service as a spare replacement for a compatible smaller size disk type: i.e. 900GB SAS disk fails, no spares available but a 1800GB SAS spare is, the 1800GB disk will be treated as a 900GB and takes over going forward. The only way to get capacity back in these situations is to manually fail out the "fake capacity" disk with a disk of the real desired capacity, then the larger disk disk to make it back into a full size spare. So long as you keep adequate spares of the size needed, you're good on a capacity front.

3a8082e126