November 7, 200817 yr Includes and Excludes of disks and user shares should be by a disk id/model number and not by "disk1,2" etc Adding a new disk that happens to change disk number or even reorganising disks shouldn't negate your entire allocation configuration.
November 9, 200817 yr Agreed. While i doubt a lot of disk shuffling happens this would make it better in the long wrong so that if disks are changed things don't get screwed up.
November 11, 200817 yr Some of us anal retentives want all our drives in order of size, parity on top and reducing from there. So.. any time there is a bigger drive introduced, it gets put in at the top of the food chain and causes the rest of the drives to be renumbered to match. When I add a drive it's a LONG process. Bonus is that all the drives and connections get exercised. I gave up on includes and excludes, and any use of user shares for adding data because of allocation issues (highwater). All new data gets written directly to the hidden drive number share.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.