› ›
Our Sites

covecube.com 
community.covecube.com 
blog.covecube.com 
wiki.covecube.com 
bitflock.com 
stablebit.com 

Howdy, Stranger!

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

Sign In with Google

Sign In Register

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


The new forum is at: http://community.covecube.com


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,


ChipMonk

About

Username
ChipMonk
Joined
Visits
0
Last Active
Roles
Member

Comments

  • 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 …
    in Poll: What do you think of the new Indexing behavior in DrivePool 1.2.1+? Comment by ChipMonk December 2012
  • Thanks for these comments Shane and Christopher. I think I'll just continue to use Archive Optimizer on its own until things become clearer. Archive Optimizer is working well for me (no duplication) and its features are more useful to me than the ot…
    in Archive Optimizer Plugin Comment by ChipMonk December 2012
  • Sure it's all about hardware - the Windows indexing resource hog doesn't matter much if there's loads of cpu firepower. But, as I mentioned above, on a lightweight server designed for energy efficient media streaming and home backups only, Windows I…
    in Server Re-index time under 1.2.7145 Comment by ChipMonk December 2012
  • Oops - missing word in last post "DrivePool is a much BETTER system than the equivalent MS package in WHS v1 ever was"
    in Server Re-index time under 1.2.7145 Comment by ChipMonk November 2012
  • Thanks again Shane - no, duplication is not an issue for me, but worth knowing. Regarding Windows Indexing - I have found it to be a pretty inefficient resource hog from the earliest days of windows and not seen much sign of improvement. DrivePool i…
    in Server Re-index time under 1.2.7145 Comment by ChipMonk November 2012
  • @Shane: ah - that makes sense. Thanks for the landing zone tip. Did DrivePool have it's own indexing system before this latest version? I'm still trying to understand why the folder information suddenly deteriorated with this latest version. Than…
    in Server Re-index time under 1.2.7145 Comment by ChipMonk November 2012
  • I have exactly the same experience (WHS 2011 Intel Atom D510MO). I think it's related to the new reliance on Windows Indexing. I usually try to have minimal Windows indexing so as not to drain the cpu and RAM on a limited machine used mainly for aud…
    in Server Re-index time under 1.2.7145 Comment by ChipMonk November 2012