Windows Home Server - Honda Pilot

N_Jay · 12-28-2009, 09:50 AM

Anyone running WHS?

Good? Bad? Ugly?

Tips? Suggestions? Warnings?

slpa1 · 12-28-2009, 07:36 PM

I've had it running on a server on my home network more than a year. It is simple to install and set up, and has worked flawlessly. If only the other MS products were as reliable!

Make sure and use 2 identical drives when building your server. WHS will automatically manage both drives, mirroring your data to the second drive for redundancy. I used 2 500GB Western Digital drives.

Also, don't bother building a server with more than 1GB of RAM. WHS will only use 512MB, no matter how much you add. I installed 1GB to have dual-channel speed, and because it was cheaper to buy it that way.

Good luck!

N_Jay · 12-28-2009, 08:40 PM

Well, the board I am using has 4gig or ram.
I would pull some, but I have nothing else to put it into.

I know it is not recommended, but I am starting off with a 4x500G RAID-5 array.

If I mirror, I only get a 1T and this way I have 1.5T

I am still fighting with the installation, a little since it completed without the proper motherboard drivers.
I think I might have screwed something up when I reinstalled the drivers.

I am debating doing a fresh installation.

slpa1 · 12-28-2009, 10:18 PM

You should try using the drives individually, not in RAID, and let WHS manage them.

WHS will take care of the data redundancy, because it automatically duplicates anything you put on one drive on the other drive. When you have more than 2, it manages those likewise.

WHS actually doesn't use RAID. It uses a technology called "drive extender." This article might interest you:

http://blogs.technet.com/homeserver/...echnology.aspx

Try a clean install of WHS without RAID. You will find that it has adequate MS drivers that work as chipset drivers, and you don't need any sound or video drivers.

slpa1 · 12-28-2009, 10:23 PM

One more thing about RAID:

WHS is plenty fast without it, and has its own redundancy built in. You won't gain anything by using RAID, assuming you can get it to work at all that way.

N_Jay · 12-28-2009, 10:42 PM

The problem I'm having is with the network driver not the RAID driver.

4 500G drives mirrored is 1T, and 4 500 G drives in a RAID 5 is 1.5T

When I go to install the network driver it says it has to unregister a bunch of stuff (.NET 2.0, etc).

Seems Intel does not want to make it easy to use a "desktop" board as a "server".

I just wish the installation would allow you to install the basic OS, then update drivers and such, then go on and install the server applications.

N_Jay · 12-28-2009, 10:52 PM

Just read that piece on WHS storage.

Great marketing piece.

They compare how the storage drives are addressed rather then the underlying technology.

Then they pat you on the back and put in one line about folder redundancy. (Uh, mirroring) (OK, Mirroring at the folder level instead of the drive level, but to get 100% redundancy you might as well have RAID 1 mirroring turned on.

It is wonderful that they hide the drive from the user. I just want that drive to be protected.

12-28-2009, 09:50 AM	#1 (permalink)
N_Jay Registered User Join Date: May 2002 Location: Chicago, NW Burbs Posts: 13,441 Feedback Score: 0 reviews	Windows Home Server Anyone running WHS? Good? Bad? Ugly? Tips? Suggestions? Warnings? __________________ However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results. Sir Winston Churchill

12-28-2009, 07:36 PM	#2 (permalink)
slpa1 Registered User Join Date: May 2007 Location: Salt Lake City, Utah Posts: 18 Feedback Score: 0 reviews	I've had it running on a server on my home network more than a year. It is simple to install and set up, and has worked flawlessly. If only the other MS products were as reliable! Make sure and use 2 identical drives when building your server. WHS will automatically manage both drives, mirroring your data to the second drive for redundancy. I used 2 500GB Western Digital drives. Also, don't bother building a server with more than 1GB of RAM. WHS will only use 512MB, no matter how much you add. I installed 1GB to have dual-channel speed, and because it was cheaper to buy it that way. Good luck! __________________ slpa1 2011 Touring Dark Cherry Pearl / Black Still learning how to use the tech stuff.

12-28-2009, 08:40 PM	#3 (permalink)
N_Jay Registered User Join Date: May 2002 Location: Chicago, NW Burbs Posts: 13,441 Feedback Score: 0 reviews	Well, the board I am using has 4gig or ram. I would pull some, but I have nothing else to put it into. I know it is not recommended, but I am starting off with a 4x500G RAID-5 array. If I mirror, I only get a 1T and this way I have 1.5T I am still fighting with the installation, a little since it completed without the proper motherboard drivers. I think I might have screwed something up when I reinstalled the drivers. I am debating doing a fresh installation. __________________ However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results. Sir Winston Churchill

12-28-2009, 10:18 PM	#4 (permalink)
slpa1 Registered User Join Date: May 2007 Location: Salt Lake City, Utah Posts: 18 Feedback Score: 0 reviews	You should try using the drives individually, not in RAID, and let WHS manage them. WHS will take care of the data redundancy, because it automatically duplicates anything you put on one drive on the other drive. When you have more than 2, it manages those likewise. WHS actually doesn't use RAID. It uses a technology called "drive extender." This article might interest you: http://blogs.technet.com/homeserver/...echnology.aspx Try a clean install of WHS without RAID. You will find that it has adequate MS drivers that work as chipset drivers, and you don't need any sound or video drivers. __________________ slpa1 2011 Touring Dark Cherry Pearl / Black Still learning how to use the tech stuff.

12-28-2009, 10:23 PM	#5 (permalink)
slpa1 Registered User Join Date: May 2007 Location: Salt Lake City, Utah Posts: 18 Feedback Score: 0 reviews	One more thing about RAID: WHS is plenty fast without it, and has its own redundancy built in. You won't gain anything by using RAID, assuming you can get it to work at all that way. __________________ slpa1 2011 Touring Dark Cherry Pearl / Black Still learning how to use the tech stuff.

12-28-2009, 10:42 PM	#6 (permalink)
N_Jay Registered User Join Date: May 2002 Location: Chicago, NW Burbs Posts: 13,441 Feedback Score: 0 reviews	The problem I'm having is with the network driver not the RAID driver. 4 500G drives mirrored is 1T, and 4 500 G drives in a RAID 5 is 1.5T When I go to install the network driver it says it has to unregister a bunch of stuff (.NET 2.0, etc). Seems Intel does not want to make it easy to use a "desktop" board as a "server". I just wish the installation would allow you to install the basic OS, then update drivers and such, then go on and install the server applications. __________________ However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results. Sir Winston Churchill

12-28-2009, 10:52 PM	#7 (permalink)
N_Jay Registered User Join Date: May 2002 Location: Chicago, NW Burbs Posts: 13,441 Feedback Score: 0 reviews	Just read that piece on WHS storage. Great marketing piece. They compare how the storage drives are addressed rather then the underlying technology. Then they pat you on the back and put in one line about folder redundancy. (Uh, mirroring) (OK, Mirroring at the folder level instead of the drive level, but to get 100% redundancy you might as well have RAID 1 mirroring turned on. It is wonderful that they hide the drive from the user. I just want that drive to be protected. __________________ However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results. Sir Winston Churchill

Remove Advertisements Sponsored Links
Piloteers.org Advertisement

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread: