Storage Spaces, Server 2012 R2 - Pool shows 99% full but is not?
My office server is running Server 2012 Datacenter R2, fully patched. I setup a Storage Pool using 2 Western Digital Red 3 TB drives. Configuration is Mirrored, Thin Provisioned with a 5 TB capacity. Everything is working fine, but recently, when I look at the Storage Pool, it says that it is 99.6% used and only has 25 GB of free space!? Have not changed anything that I can think of.
However, the 2 Volumes in the pool show that they have the following:
Volume D: 1.25 TB Capacity and 816 GB Free
Volume E: 3.75 TB capacity and 2.82 TB Free
I've tried various powershell commands to trim, defrag, slabconsolidate.
I also moved 142 GB of files off the Storage Pool - and the free space remained at 25 GB?!
Nothing helps - and I am not by any means a storage spaces or powershell expert - just trying things that I've discovered in my research.
This screenshot shows what, to me, doesn't make sense. Disks with lots of free space and a storage pool that is almost full!:
Am I missing some important concept or is my Storage Pool somehow corrupt, etc.? Any ideas on how to repair or make sense of what I'm seeing?
However, the 2 Volumes in the pool show that they have the following:
Volume D: 1.25 TB Capacity and 816 GB Free
Volume E: 3.75 TB capacity and 2.82 TB Free
I've tried various powershell commands to trim, defrag, slabconsolidate.
I also moved 142 GB of files off the Storage Pool - and the free space remained at 25 GB?!
Nothing helps - and I am not by any means a storage spaces or powershell expert - just trying things that I've discovered in my research.
This screenshot shows what, to me, doesn't make sense. Disks with lots of free space and a storage pool that is almost full!:
Am I missing some important concept or is my Storage Pool somehow corrupt, etc.? Any ideas on how to repair or make sense of what I'm seeing?
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
No you still haven't grasped what mirror is about.
You have two disks in a RAID-1 configuration (aka Mirroring). These two disks are presented as a single virtual volume to your system, any write to this volume means a write to both disks, so you only have the physical capacity of one disk. This means that if one disk fails your data is still safe (but at risk) on the other.
Just remember that the only certainties in life are Death & Taxes and that HDD's will fail!!!
You have two disks in a RAID-1 configuration (aka Mirroring). These two disks are presented as a single virtual volume to your system, any write to this volume means a write to both disks, so you only have the physical capacity of one disk. This means that if one disk fails your data is still safe (but at risk) on the other.
Just remember that the only certainties in life are Death & Taxes and that HDD's will fail!!!
ASKER
Gerald,
Thanks for your reply. I thoroughly understand what RAID1 / Mirror means (and RAID0, 5, 10, etc. - have used them many times (in hardware RAID setups)). It is the 'Allocation' part that left me a bit confused...
Thanks for your reply. I thoroughly understand what RAID1 / Mirror means (and RAID0, 5, 10, etc. - have used them many times (in hardware RAID setups)). It is the 'Allocation' part that left me a bit confused...
Sorry Scion, it was this bit that made me think you didnt understand what RAID-1 was "> A Pool with a physical capacity of 5.46 TB (ie, 2 x 2.73)"
ASKER
Gerald, thanks for the update. I may be wrong (have been many times before!), so please correct me if need be! I interpret the pool 'physical capacity' to be what you could 'theoretically' use - ie, with (2) 2.73 TB drives you could get up to 5.46 TB of storage IF you went with RAID 0.
ASKER
From what you've offered I think Storage Spaces is trying to tell me I've got the following (feel free to add to the discussion if I've got anything wrong):
> (2) physical 3TB disks in the pool (with 2.73 of available space on each)
> A Pool with a physical capacity of 5.46 TB (ie, 2 x 2.73)
> A virtual disk, thin provisioned to 5 TB
> Of the 5TB virtual disk capacity, 2.72 TB of it is allocated
That last one is where I am still a bit confused.
The physical disks show as a capacity of 2.73 TB each, used space of 2.72 TB and 6.75 GB free. Not sure why, but I'd guess that the 6.75 GB is what is left after file system overhead, etc.
The virtual disk shows as a capacity of 5 TB (which I set to allow for growth) and an 'Allocation' of 2.72 TB. I assume that by 'Allocation', Storage Spaces is telling me that I've only given it 2.72 TB of physical space to work with and that I'd need to give it more (physical disks) if I want to reach my 5 TB capacity. Screenshot:
I'm going to mark this question as answered and award points but welcome any additional comments or corrections regarding what I've said above so that others can learn as much as possible from this question. Thanks!!