Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In with Google


What do you think of DrivePool's folder sizes?

In order to better support our growing community we've set up a new more powerful forum.

The new forum is at:

The new forum is running IP.Board and will be our primary forum from now on.

This forum is being retired, but will remain online indefinitely in order to preserve its contents. This forum is now read only.

Thank you,

Poll: What do you think of the new Indexing behavior in DrivePool 1.2.1+?

edited December 2012 in DrivePool
DrivePool 1.2.1+ now uses Microsoft Windows Search to show you the folder distribution chart on the DrivePool tab in the Dashboard.


Since Microsoft Windows Search is enabled by default on all Windows Home Server 2011 variants, this seems like a reasonable approach.

What do you think?

Cast your vote in the poll on the right.


  • The biggest problem I have with it is 10 of my 12 shared folders in the pool show 0B even though they are all in excess of 100 GB. The results are useless.

  • Hmm, not a huge fan at the moment.


    I have a low power server (AMD E-450) with 6 drives and with previous versions of DrivePool it would take a while to initially index but once done would reliably display the info. The latest version of DrivePool works fine but gets all of the folder sizes wrong and seems to continuously re-indexing them, which causes the dashboard to hang.



  • I am also experiencing some issues, which might be caused by the continuing re-indexing. As I was in the process of removing four 1 tb drives from my pool, I had the Dashboard open all the time while being logged on to the server using RDP. When connecting to the server Again after 8 hours or so, which seemed sufficient to remove one drive from the pool, Dashboard would hang with an excessive memory consumption. The only thing to do would be to close Dashboard via Task Manager and restart it.
  • Covecube
    The problem with doing it ourselves, like before, is that we can't turn Windows Search off. So in effect, we'll be indexing twice.

    Now we already do real-time file size tracking, but that's a simpler, less expensive, algorithm.

    If we do implement real-time folder size tracking it will mean this:
    • For every file open / close, we have to determine which shared folder that file is in and update the statistics for that folder.
    • If the shared folder list changes, then we have to manage that. So we might have to re-measure at that point.
    This will happen for every single file open / close, whether you're in the Dashboard or not. So it will slow down the overall I/O of the server at all times. And we're doing this for the sole purpose of showing you that folders chart, nothing else.

    I really don't like that solution.

    Perhaps there is some middle ground where we can update the folder sizes in the background from Windows Search, but only when the Dashboard is open.

    I'm open to suggestions.
  • I made my comments in the "Server Re-index time under 1.2.7145" thread when I noticed that something had changed and I could no longer get sensible distribution results. But, as I also indicated, my server's job is to provide a home media streaming and backup service as economically and reliably as possible. To this end I have the Windows Indexing Service switched off and, now I'm used to the idea, I don't miss the breakdown of file distribution one bit! With a lightweight cpu and motherboard, I want to reserve what computing power I have to primarily do the important stuff. Whatever you decide to implement, please bear in mind that a growing number of us are running "lean and green" systems which means that "nice to have" features should have an "off" switch.
    I continue to be delighted with the performance of DrivePool and Stable bit Scanner - these comments are not intended as criticism in any way but may help with your decision.
  • I think both ways should be selectable from the dashboard as it gives a method to disable both for faster io. If people like the fancy breakdown and are happy with the speed / energy hit then let them use it.

    On a personal note, I like the current build as I have windows search disabled so I have no indexing at all so cant comment if the windows search is giving good results.
  • What I have noticed is that the folder distribution chart seems much slower with the most recent build upgrade.
  • I've recently installed DrivePool 1.2.4 and noticed that all folders except client back-ups are listed as having size 0B (which they obviously don't have). Is this an issue with the indexing configuration? Which drive(s) have to be indexed: the pool drive or the physical drives? I have to select the physical drives as the pool drive seems to be ignored by the indexing service (the to be indexed file number is way too low).
  • Resident Guru
    Hi Nyarly, please see my response to your other post in

    If the steps provided don't resolve your problem, I'd try contacting stablebit via their contact form.
  • Covecube
    5 vs.8 votes is hardly conclusive. The votes are hardly representative of all the DrivePool users.

    But I do get the point, some people are experiencing slow downs in this area. I'll see what I can do to alleviate them for the 1.3 final.
Sign In or Register to comment.