<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Expanding the capacity of my Media Server</title>
	<atom:link href="http://carltonbale.com/expanding-the-capacity-of-my-media-server/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://carltonbale.com/expanding-the-capacity-of-my-media-server/</link>
	<description>A personal take on tech and home theater</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 May 2012 15:29:24 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Carlton Bale</title>
		<link>http://carltonbale.com/expanding-the-capacity-of-my-media-server/comment-page-3/#comment-877</link>
		<dc:creator>Carlton Bale</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Jul 2009 13:24:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://carltonbale.com/blog/archives/149#comment-877</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve never heard of shrinking RAID arrays. Your best bet may be getting a few cheap drives, using them temporarily, and then selling them on eBay, but that is a pain to do.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve never heard of shrinking RAID arrays. Your best bet may be getting a few cheap drives, using them temporarily, and then selling them on eBay, but that is a pain to do.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nate</title>
		<link>http://carltonbale.com/expanding-the-capacity-of-my-media-server/comment-page-3/#comment-876</link>
		<dc:creator>Nate</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Jul 2009 08:37:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://carltonbale.com/blog/archives/149#comment-876</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m switching over to an Unraid server and am going to use some of my drives from my raid5 server.  Does anyone know if it&#039;s possible to &#039;shrink&#039; a partition in w2k3 server (google says probably for 2K3) and if it&#039;s possible to shrink a raid5 array much like it&#039;s possible to expand it. Hmmm..</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m switching over to an Unraid server and am going to use some of my drives from my raid5 server.  Does anyone know if it&#8217;s possible to &#8216;shrink&#8217; a partition in w2k3 server (google says probably for 2K3) and if it&#8217;s possible to shrink a raid5 array much like it&#8217;s possible to expand it. Hmmm..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: funhouse69</title>
		<link>http://carltonbale.com/expanding-the-capacity-of-my-media-server/comment-page-3/#comment-875</link>
		<dc:creator>funhouse69</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Feb 2009 18:57:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://carltonbale.com/blog/archives/149#comment-875</guid>
		<description>I thought I would post an update, Seagate finally responded to the Support Case I opened after about 2 weeks (even though they said it would be 24 hours), they released a new firmware for several different drives of which my 1.5T&#039;s were included. 

I waited about a week to make sure that they didn&#039;t pull down the firmware then applied it to a single drive to make sure that I didn&#039;t have any issues. After a few days I upgraded the rest of them and **Knock on Wood** so far so good.

One thing I noticed right off the bat is that the Activity LED on the drives went back to normal. With the original firmware it was opposite, the LED was on when the drive was idle and off when it was inactive. I felt like this was a very good sign.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I thought I would post an update, Seagate finally responded to the Support Case I opened after about 2 weeks (even though they said it would be 24 hours), they released a new firmware for several different drives of which my 1.5T&#8217;s were included. </p>
<p>I waited about a week to make sure that they didn&#8217;t pull down the firmware then applied it to a single drive to make sure that I didn&#8217;t have any issues. After a few days I upgraded the rest of them and **Knock on Wood** so far so good.</p>
<p>One thing I noticed right off the bat is that the Activity LED on the drives went back to normal. With the original firmware it was opposite, the LED was on when the drive was idle and off when it was inactive. I felt like this was a very good sign.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nate</title>
		<link>http://carltonbale.com/expanding-the-capacity-of-my-media-server/comment-page-3/#comment-874</link>
		<dc:creator>Nate</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Jan 2009 21:26:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://carltonbale.com/blog/archives/149#comment-874</guid>
		<description>I&#039;d side w/3ware on this one (for now).  Their name is as bulletproof as seagates was (until they started releasing drives  &gt;=1TB).

I&#039;d say the reasons you&#039;re having the drives &quot;time out&quot; is directly related to the problems the drives themselves are having with timing out while streaming data from them.  For instance, if you&#039;re even doing something as low intensity as playing an mp3 the song (directly from the drive no raid involved) will stop for 3-10 seconds before resuming play.  In RAID configurations (due to how raid works) apparently the problem is amplified since the controllers are thinking that the drives are now offline or unavailable when really there&#039;s just some odd delay issue going on with the drives.

Newegg reviews have documented this issue very well, so much that seagate even has a somewhat admittance of guilt - does this sound like it might be you?

ST31500341AS 1.5 TB
Some Seagate Barracuda 7200.11 1.5TB hard drives may show uncharacteristic operation when used with Mac and Linux operating systems in multi-drive configurations. Users may experiences pauses in video streaming applications or a dropped drive from RAID arrays. Customers seeing these symptoms should contact Seagate Technical Support for a firmware upgrade at discsupport@seagate.com or http://www.seagate.com/www/en-us/about/contact_us/. 


I&#039;m having the exact same issue with a 1TB seagate drive, but support is currently refusing to admit that the problem is their drive.  I&#039;m pretty disappointed w/seagate since between home and work all the drives (except for a raptor 10K) are seagates (so over 30 seagates total) and I&#039;ve never had an issue with them (until the larger than 750GB models).  Mistakes happen I&#039;m fine w/that, but the way they&#039;re handling my problem with the drive I have is pretty frustrating.

Nate</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;d side w/3ware on this one (for now).  Their name is as bulletproof as seagates was (until they started releasing drives  &gt;=1TB).</p>
<p>I&#8217;d say the reasons you&#8217;re having the drives &#8220;time out&#8221; is directly related to the problems the drives themselves are having with timing out while streaming data from them.  For instance, if you&#8217;re even doing something as low intensity as playing an mp3 the song (directly from the drive no raid involved) will stop for 3-10 seconds before resuming play.  In RAID configurations (due to how raid works) apparently the problem is amplified since the controllers are thinking that the drives are now offline or unavailable when really there&#8217;s just some odd delay issue going on with the drives.</p>
<p>Newegg reviews have documented this issue very well, so much that seagate even has a somewhat admittance of guilt &#8211; does this sound like it might be you?</p>
<p>ST31500341AS 1.5 TB<br />
Some Seagate Barracuda 7200.11 1.5TB hard drives may show uncharacteristic operation when used with Mac and Linux operating systems in multi-drive configurations. Users may experiences pauses in video streaming applications or a dropped drive from RAID arrays. Customers seeing these symptoms should contact Seagate Technical Support for a firmware upgrade at <a href="mailto:discsupport@seagate.com">discsupport@seagate.com</a> or <a href="http://www.seagate.com/www/en-us/about/contact_us/" rel="nofollow">http://www.seagate.com/www/en-us/about/contact_us/</a>. </p>
<p>I&#8217;m having the exact same issue with a 1TB seagate drive, but support is currently refusing to admit that the problem is their drive.  I&#8217;m pretty disappointed w/seagate since between home and work all the drives (except for a raptor 10K) are seagates (so over 30 seagates total) and I&#8217;ve never had an issue with them (until the larger than 750GB models).  Mistakes happen I&#8217;m fine w/that, but the way they&#8217;re handling my problem with the drive I have is pretty frustrating.</p>
<p>Nate</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: funhouse69</title>
		<link>http://carltonbale.com/expanding-the-capacity-of-my-media-server/comment-page-3/#comment-873</link>
		<dc:creator>funhouse69</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Jan 2009 05:25:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://carltonbale.com/blog/archives/149#comment-873</guid>
		<description>Anyone else have any issues with a 3Ware Controller and the Seagate 1.5TB Drives? This is so odd... I&#039;ve had a total of 7 Seagate ST31500341AS Drives connected to my 3Ware 9550SX-16ML Controller in a RAID 5 since mid October and haven&#039;t had any issues. 

Last week I had one of the drives &quot;Time Out&quot; and went off line. I was able to rebuild the array by using the same drive by removing it and reinserting it. Just last night I had yet another drive to the same exact thing. I haven&#039;t made any changes to the array whatsoever. No drive added or removed, the amount of data on the Array has increased slowly but I still have 1.9TB Free.

I did a little research and heard that there has been some issues with the drives firmware and there are newer versions out there. 

Of course 3Ware says this is a Seagate issues and Seagate says this is a 3Ware issue. 

Why would this work for 3 Months without a single hiccup only to have this happen twice in one week. We all know that if the second drive fell off line when the first one was off I would have been SCREWED!!!

Any thoughts???</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Anyone else have any issues with a 3Ware Controller and the Seagate 1.5TB Drives? This is so odd&#8230; I&#8217;ve had a total of 7 Seagate ST31500341AS Drives connected to my 3Ware 9550SX-16ML Controller in a RAID 5 since mid October and haven&#8217;t had any issues. </p>
<p>Last week I had one of the drives &#8220;Time Out&#8221; and went off line. I was able to rebuild the array by using the same drive by removing it and reinserting it. Just last night I had yet another drive to the same exact thing. I haven&#8217;t made any changes to the array whatsoever. No drive added or removed, the amount of data on the Array has increased slowly but I still have 1.9TB Free.</p>
<p>I did a little research and heard that there has been some issues with the drives firmware and there are newer versions out there. </p>
<p>Of course 3Ware says this is a Seagate issues and Seagate says this is a 3Ware issue. </p>
<p>Why would this work for 3 Months without a single hiccup only to have this happen twice in one week. We all know that if the second drive fell off line when the first one was off I would have been SCREWED!!!</p>
<p>Any thoughts???</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Carlton Bale</title>
		<link>http://carltonbale.com/expanding-the-capacity-of-my-media-server/comment-page-3/#comment-872</link>
		<dc:creator>Carlton Bale</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Jan 2009 02:45:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://carltonbale.com/blog/archives/149#comment-872</guid>
		<description>Yes, Windows Home Server does redundancy through 2 copies of the same file instead of through parity data.  It&#039;s not RAID 1, but it is similar in data usage. It is less efficient from a storage density standpoint but better from a data recovery standpoint due to no stripped data and independent drives that allow data recovery even with multiple drive failures.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, Windows Home Server does redundancy through 2 copies of the same file instead of through parity data.  It&#8217;s not RAID 1, but it is similar in data usage. It is less efficient from a storage density standpoint but better from a data recovery standpoint due to no stripped data and independent drives that allow data recovery even with multiple drive failures.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nate</title>
		<link>http://carltonbale.com/expanding-the-capacity-of-my-media-server/comment-page-3/#comment-871</link>
		<dc:creator>Nate</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Jan 2009 02:40:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://carltonbale.com/blog/archives/149#comment-871</guid>
		<description>Correct me if I&#039;m wrong, but isn&#039;t the data redundancy that windows home server offers basically only a software RAID1.  So if you have 1.5TB of data you will need another 1.5TB for it to be backed up in case a hard drive goes bad.... Right?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Correct me if I&#8217;m wrong, but isn&#8217;t the data redundancy that windows home server offers basically only a software RAID1.  So if you have 1.5TB of data you will need another 1.5TB for it to be backed up in case a hard drive goes bad&#8230;. Right?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pete LeBanc</title>
		<link>http://carltonbale.com/expanding-the-capacity-of-my-media-server/comment-page-3/#comment-870</link>
		<dc:creator>Pete LeBanc</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Oct 2008 04:08:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://carltonbale.com/blog/archives/149#comment-870</guid>
		<description>Hey guys I hope that this is not inappropriate to post here but I thought it might be ok based on the subject matter of this thread. I am upgrading one of my RAID Arrays and wanted to see if anyone was interested in the old HDD&#039;s. Here&#039;s the info

I am selling a total of Ten (10) slightly used Internal Seagate 750GB SATA II Hard Drives Model ST3750640AS. These drives are currently being used in a RAID Array and are being replaced by larger drives.

As you know Seagate Drives comes with the best in the business 5 year warranty. Each of these drives have approximately 4 years left in their warranties - Expires between 03-22-2012 &amp; 11-07-2012) depending on the individual drive.

As mentioned these drives are currently in service and will be removed in approximately one week. Once they are removed they will be shipped out to whoever purchases them.

I am asking $650 for all Ten Drives and I will throw in CONUS shipping and Pay Pal Charges.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey guys I hope that this is not inappropriate to post here but I thought it might be ok based on the subject matter of this thread. I am upgrading one of my RAID Arrays and wanted to see if anyone was interested in the old HDD&#8217;s. Here&#8217;s the info</p>
<p>I am selling a total of Ten (10) slightly used Internal Seagate 750GB SATA II Hard Drives Model ST3750640AS. These drives are currently being used in a RAID Array and are being replaced by larger drives.</p>
<p>As you know Seagate Drives comes with the best in the business 5 year warranty. Each of these drives have approximately 4 years left in their warranties &#8211; Expires between 03-22-2012 &amp; 11-07-2012) depending on the individual drive.</p>
<p>As mentioned these drives are currently in service and will be removed in approximately one week. Once they are removed they will be shipped out to whoever purchases them.</p>
<p>I am asking $650 for all Ten Drives and I will throw in CONUS shipping and Pay Pal Charges.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Markus</title>
		<link>http://carltonbale.com/expanding-the-capacity-of-my-media-server/comment-page-3/#comment-869</link>
		<dc:creator>Markus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Sep 2008 12:15:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://carltonbale.com/blog/archives/149#comment-869</guid>
		<description>Thank you very much for your help. Yes it seems to me that the controller did the expanding but the OS does not get aware of the new situation. I can see 3 partitions in the diskmanager tool. 2 with 2T and a small one in between (some GB). The 1st got a drive letter and is shown in explorer but not accessable. So I believe that it is just the partition information that is wrong due to the MBR...
I already set up a WHS and want to copy the data to it, but therefore I need access..... 

Thanks again,

Markus</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you very much for your help. Yes it seems to me that the controller did the expanding but the OS does not get aware of the new situation. I can see 3 partitions in the diskmanager tool. 2 with 2T and a small one in between (some GB). The 1st got a drive letter and is shown in explorer but not accessable. So I believe that it is just the partition information that is wrong due to the MBR&#8230;<br />
I already set up a WHS and want to copy the data to it, but therefore I need access&#8230;.. </p>
<p>Thanks again,</p>
<p>Markus</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Carlton Bale</title>
		<link>http://carltonbale.com/expanding-the-capacity-of-my-media-server/comment-page-3/#comment-868</link>
		<dc:creator>Carlton Bale</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Sep 2008 09:46:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://carltonbale.com/blog/archives/149#comment-868</guid>
		<description>Markus: Thanks for the more detailed explanation. I didn&#039;t realize that you had already expanded the partition as well as the actual RAID array itself.  In general, it&#039;s a two-part process where you use the admin tool to change the size of the RAID Set/Volume Set and the operating system (or third-party utility) to expand the partition. I would think you would only have issues if you tried to modify the operating system partition; the OS should just ignore the additional drive space. Unfortunately, this doesn&#039;t seem like the case.

I&#039;m not at all familiar with the highpoint admin tool. First off, I&#039;d recommend calling Highpoint and talking with their support staff. Hopefully they can help you out. If not, you may want to try posting on the StorageReview.com forums, though I didn&#039;t find much help there. Finally, you can try to down-size the volume set (not the actual array, just the volume set on it) back to the previous size. If the admin tool can do that, it might make your data accessible.

It&#039;s problems like this that caused me to abandon RAID in favor of something more flexible and recoverable, the strong points for Windows Home Server and UnRAID.

Best of luck to you!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Markus: Thanks for the more detailed explanation. I didn&#8217;t realize that you had already expanded the partition as well as the actual RAID array itself.  In general, it&#8217;s a two-part process where you use the admin tool to change the size of the RAID Set/Volume Set and the operating system (or third-party utility) to expand the partition. I would think you would only have issues if you tried to modify the operating system partition; the OS should just ignore the additional drive space. Unfortunately, this doesn&#8217;t seem like the case.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m not at all familiar with the highpoint admin tool. First off, I&#8217;d recommend calling Highpoint and talking with their support staff. Hopefully they can help you out. If not, you may want to try posting on the StorageReview.com forums, though I didn&#8217;t find much help there. Finally, you can try to down-size the volume set (not the actual array, just the volume set on it) back to the previous size. If the admin tool can do that, it might make your data accessible.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s problems like this that caused me to abandon RAID in favor of something more flexible and recoverable, the strong points for Windows Home Server and UnRAID.</p>
<p>Best of luck to you!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

