@r3dpand4 said in Configuring Multi-Resilient Volume with Storage Spaces:

Should be noted that any server running 1709 cannot be added to S2D pools as it stands currently since it's not considered production ready....

Correct. S2D is gone from non-GA WS2016.

https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-server/get-started/server-1709-relnotes

Storage Spaces Direct

Storage Spaces Direct is not included in Windows Server, version 1709. If you call Enable-ClusterStorageSpacesDirect or its alias Enable-ClusterS2D, on a server running Windows Server, version 1709, you will receive an error with the message "The requested operation is not supported". It is also not supported to introduce servers running Windows Server, version 1709 into a Windows Server 2016 Storage Spaces Direct deployment.

@r3dpand4 said in Microsoft Removes Storage Spaces Direct from Windows Server 2016:

@tim_g said in Microsoft Removes Storage Spaces Direct from Windows Server 2016:

@scottalanmiller said in Microsoft Removes Storage Spaces Direct from Windows Server 2016:

@darek-hamann said in Microsoft Removes Storage Spaces Direct from Windows Server 2016:

The implementation of an Azure Stack would be something to get our heads around for the time being.

Hopefully it is better than the actual Azure system!

It is Azure, same thing, but you have a physical node on-prem. You pay for the hardware, and you get Azure a little cheaper, but it's fully managed by them.

It's really only for remote places with bad bandwidth imho.

Think like, needing cloud from an 18-wheeler in a remote location.

This sounds like a crappy version of the AWS Snowball

Completely different.

This is like making your portion of the AWS cloud in-house, including the entire AWS stack.

Again, not too useful unless you are trying to bring the cloud to a remote location to avoid excessive latency or to somewhere the internet doesn't exist... like linking it to a satellite connection during a disaster or something.

There are other real uses, but that would be for bigger enterprises... for most SMBs, Azure Stack would never be a consideration.

@quixoticjeremy said in Storage Spaces and ReFS:

@dafyre said in Storage Spaces and ReFS:

@quixoticjeremy said in Storage Spaces and ReFS:

@dafyre said in Storage Spaces and ReFS:

@dustinb3403 said in Storage Spaces and ReFS:

I might need to investigate Wine again, when I tried it, things were rough to say the least.

I haven't run Wine in a while, but when last I tried, any app that needed SSL did not work. Browsers couldn't do HTTPS, any app that tried to do encryption or anything like that would fail... If they'd fix that a lot more games and online things would work.

Interesting, had no idea about this.

This is relatively recent as well, like in the Wine 1.9 & 2.0 branches.

Good to know, I was just debating on switching my gaming machine over recently, glad I didn't if this recent hiccup is going to cause issues.

Steam under Wine worked well, as did several of my games. But WOW did not.

@travisdh1 said in NextCloud: Insuffienct Storage:

Which base OS is being used? Debian/Ubuntu or RedHat/CentOS/Fedora? Log files will be different between the two that I'd want to look at. Either way probably looking for the apache/httpd log.

Fedora -

@Tim_G thanks

Overview

Storage Spaces Direct seamlessly integrates with the features you know today that make up the Windows Server software defined storage stack, including Scale-Out File Server, Clustered Shared Volume File System (CSVFS), Storage Spaces and Failover Clustering. Figure 4 below illustrates the “Storage Spaces Direct” stack:

@coliver said in Math Check: 45x 4TB drives in a BackBlaze system.......:

@travisdh1 said in Math Check: 45x 4TB drives in a BackBlaze system.......:

@DustinB3403 said in Math Check: 45x 4TB drives in a BackBlaze system.......:

Someone needs to rip that earring out of his head.

Maybe then he'll get a clue.

He wouldn't get as many views then, and that's really the point. People don't like watching someone succeed nearly so much as the utterly stupid. (See his $100,000 pc build for another one.)

Views also get him sponsorship which is where the $100,000 PC came from.

Exactly. The sponsors don't care that the content is banal. They care about the numbers of viewers and to a lesser degree their demographics.