Re: Windows Home Server performance - very slow.. any ideas?

["Paul" <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Well it must be good then ;o)

--- In ukha_d@xxxxxxx, "Phil Harris" <phil@...> wrote:
>
> That's my thread. ;-)
>
> Phil
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ukha_d@xxxxxxx [mailto:ukha_d@xxxxxxx] On Behalf
> > Of Paul
> > Sent: 07 December 2009 21:03
> > To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
> > Subject: [ukha_d] Re: Windows Home Server performance - very
slow.. any
> > ideas?
> >
> > This looks like quite a good thread to follow
> > http://forum.wegotserved.com/index.php?/topic/8335-demigrator-exe-
> > again/ Have you proved it is demigrator causing the issue, i.e.
if you
> > kill the process do you get better performance?
> >
> > Paul
> >
> > --- In ukha_d@xxxxxxx, "keyvan2r" <k1@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Thanks for the post Phil.
> > > The choking is all to do with disk access, its very rare
that cpu use
> > monitore on task manager or performance console runs high. The
> > indicators which are maxing out are all to do physical disk
access seem
> > to be ones which run to their maximum.
> > > I looked at Drive Extender Migrator (demigrator) and the MS
tech
> > brief on WHS Drive extender which covers load-balancing and
> > duplication.
> > > There does not seem to be that much one can do about it!!!
> > > you can't unistall demigrator becuase then whs won't see the
extended
> > volume. I can't imagine how I would go about testing what h/w
> > combination is the problem short of building another machine!
> > > All in all, its seems to be hopeless!!
> > > Thanks anyway, will look for more things to try before I go
back  to
> > the drawing board.
> > >
> > > --- In ukha_d@xxxxxxx, "Phil Harris" <phil@>
wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Demigrator.exe I mean...
> > > >
> > > > Google it and you'll see it's an issue that others have
had...
> > > >
> > > > Phil
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: ukha_d@xxxxxxx [mailto:ukha_d@xxxxxxx] On
> > Behalf
> > > > > Of Phil Harris
> > > > > Sent: 07 December 2009 19:14
> > > > > To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
> > > > > Subject: RE: [ukha_d] Windows Home Server
performance - very
> > slow.. any
> > > > > ideas?
> > > > >
> > > > > Check task manager for what's taking up CPU time
when it does
> > that -
> > > > > you may
> > > > > well find that it's hitting something called
"Demingrator.exe"
> > ... if
> > > > > it is
> > > > > then it seems that some hardware combinations are
prone to
> > Demigrator
> > > > > taking
> > > > > a hell of a toll whereas other hardware (which may
be far less
> > > > > powerful)
> > > > > doesn't seem so affected.
> > > > >
> > > > > Phil
> > > > >
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: ukha_d@xxxxxxx [mailto:ukha_d@xxxxxxx] On
> > > > > Behalf
> > > > > > Of keyvan2r
> > > > > > Sent: 07 December 2009 18:18
> > > > > > To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
> > > > > > Subject: [ukha_d] Windows Home Server
performance - very slow..
> > any
> > > > > > ideas?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hi All
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I moved my DVDs and Blu-rays from my old
Buffalo 3.5Tb NAS box
> > to a
> > > > > > self-build WHS box. I am using a fairly high
performance MB
> > (ASUS),
> > > > > cpu
> > > > > > (E4600) with 6gb of ram. I have currently 4
hd's connected via
> > the MB
> > > > > > sata ports. these consist of 2xWD 1.5tb and
2x Hitachi 2Tb
> > drives.
> > > > > This
> > > > > > shows up as 6.37tb with 3.15tb free after I
copied my movies &
> > music.
> > > > > > I am getting really really sluggish
performance from this
> > setup.
> > > > > > I know (think)its all related to physical
disk I/O. The
> > performance
> > > > > is
> > > > > > so bad that it virtually makes it useless for
streaming DVD or
> > blu-
> > > > > ray
> > > > > > movies. In fact on most occasions it takes
the best part of 1
> > to 2
> > > > > > minutes to either run WHS console or RDP into
the server.
> > Sometimes
> > > > > it
> > > > > > times out...Also opening things like explorer
or even double
> > clicking
> > > > > > shortcuts takes ages to respond.
> > > > > > When running the performance monitor (from
server admin tools)
> > it
> > > > > looks
> > > > > > like when any of the shares are being
accessed by client pc's
> > all
> > > > > > physical disk activity indicators go to full
/ 100% usaged. The
> > cpu
> > > > > > load remains ok (between 3% to 20%) but all
indicators such as:
> > > > > > current disk queue length
> > > > > > avg disk queue length
> > > > > > avg disk write queue length
> > > > > > avg disk read queue length
> > > > > > These all go to 100% or full usage every 2 or
3 seconds during
> > any
> > > > > form
> > > > > > of disk access.
> > > > > > Is this normal?? If so then it seems WHS is
not that good for
> > large
> > > > > > disk managment. I am sure this can not be the
case.
> > > > > > Is there any way I can improve disk
performance. Is there
> > anywhere
> > > > > were
> > > > > > settings can be altered to sort this problem?
> > > > > > Is there anyone else with this issue with
similar type of HD
> > > > > capacity?
> > > > > > I have looked on a few forums for WHS and no
joy so far.
> > > > > > Any help, advice, or even pointing to a good
resource to
> > research
> > > > > this
> > > > > > issue would be most appreciated.
> > > > > > If I can not resolve this I will have to
scrap the WHS solution
> > and
> > > > > > look at alternatives which work like unRAID
or other disk-
> > server
> > > > > > solutions - that would be a real pain..!!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thank you
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ------------------------------------
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > __________ Information from ESET NOD32
Antivirus, version of
> > virus
> > > > > > signature database 4667 (20091207) __________
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The message was checked by ESET NOD32
Antivirus.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > http://www.eset.com
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus,
version of
> > virus
> > > > > signature
> > > > > database 4668 (20091207) __________
> > > > >
> > > > > The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
> > > > >
> > > > > http://www.eset.com
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ------------------------------------
> > > > >
> > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus,
version of
> > virus
> > > > > signature database 4668 (20091207) __________
> > > > >
> > > > > The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
> > > > >
> > > > > http://www.eset.com
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus,
version of virus
> > signature
> > > > database 4668 (20091207) __________
> > > >
> > > > The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
> > > >
> > > > http://www.eset.com
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> > __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of
virus
> > signature database 4668 (20091207) __________
> >
> > The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
> >
> > http://www.eset.com
> >
> >
>
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
signature
> database 4668 (20091207) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>




------------------------------------