PR.

Installing Whs2011 On > 2Tb Disk

9 posts in this topic

I'm getting a lot of conflicting info here, I keep reading that it's possible to install WHS2011 on a disk greater than 2TB (or in my case a 6TB RAID5 array).

However I cannot get it to work. If I create a single 6TB array install gets to "Copying Windows Files" then fails with error Win7 setup exited with 31. I removed one of the 1.8TB drives and ran through the install again, this time it finished however the RAID array was listed as Primary and on reboot it wouldn't boot as if the boot partition was missing...

Anyone know what I'm doing wrong?!

EDIT/ Perhaps I should add that I have an Asus P8H67M EVO with a UEFI bios.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Upgrade to a WGS Supporter Account to remove this ad.

I'm getting a lot of conflicting info here, I keep reading that it's possible to install WHS2011 on a disk greater than 2TB (or in my case a 6TB RAID5 array).

However I cannot get it to work. If I create a single 6TB array install gets to "Copying Windows Files" then fails with error Win7 setup exited with 31. I removed one of the 1.8TB drives and ran through the install again, this time it finished however the RAID array was listed as Primary and on reboot it wouldn't boot as if the boot partition was missing...

Anyone know what I'm doing wrong?!

EDIT/ Perhaps I should add that I have an Asus P8H67M EVO with a UEFI bios.

**************

Yes Whs 2011 is capable of up to 16tb arrays (supported). Most

folks don't put the OS drive on the same array as the data array.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very odd, if I take a drive out of the RAID5 array and install, the install does go through and won't boot but when I check it's actually installed to the RAID5 array (that it supposedly failed on earlier.)

Now I've yanked all the RAID5 drives, and let it install to the removed drive, that seems to have worked and hopefully I can add the RAID5 disks back on later...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm getting a lot of conflicting info here, I keep reading that it's possible to install WHS2011 on a disk greater than 2TB (or in my case a 6TB RAID5 array).

However I cannot get it to work. If I create a single 6TB array install gets to "Copying Windows Files" then fails with error Win7 setup exited with 31. I removed one of the 1.8TB drives and ran through the install again, this time it finished however the RAID array was listed as Primary and on reboot it wouldn't boot as if the boot partition was missing...

Anyone know what I'm doing wrong?!

EDIT/ Perhaps I should add that I have an Asus P8H67M EVO with a UEFI bios.

I have mine installed on a 1.8TB array. To my understanding if you want the array to be bootable must be a Legacy array which is limited by BIOS to 2gb. So to your question can I install on a 6TB array as the boot device my understanding is no

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have mine installed on a 1.8TB array. To my understanding if you want the array to be bootable must be a Legacy array which is limited by BIOS to 2gb. So to your question can I install on a 6TB array as the boot device my understanding is no

How I see it, you have 3 options:

1. Do what I did and if your raid controller allows it. Split the array into two separate volumes/luns. My areca card allows for this so I created a 120G slice (min whs 2011 will install to) and installed. I removed the D: drive and then added the rest of the space as D: (warning will mess with backups built into WHS)

2. Install the OS on a separate drive under 2G and then add the raid 5 in after the install.

3. Buy a really expensive motherboard that the bios supports EFI. This will be the future and I feel the proper way but not a lot of support for this yet.

This problem is going to be huge once those whs disks start shipping. Without experiencing this before most people won't know what to search for. I can smell a blog post coming soon on this one. <Hint Hint>

EDIT: So I missed that you have a UEFI motherboard. I am jealous. Make sure the option is turned on in the bios before installing. That is my only suggestion at that point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup, I had a UEFI motherboard but WHS2011 didn't seem interested.

Well after a lot of messing about (much more than WHSv1) it's installed and seems to be running ok, there was a period after doing Windows Updates that nothing in the dashboard would load but that now seems fine.

I've started initializing the array using the Intel Rapid Storage program, after around 12hours it's 13% complete. Writing to the array atm though is absolutely awful, I've seen rights occasionally hit 15mb/s but mostly it's around 600k!! Hoping it sorts itself out once the array is fully initialized.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup, I had a UEFI motherboard but WHS2011 didn't seem interested.

Well after a lot of messing about (much more than WHSv1) it's installed and seems to be running ok, there was a period after doing Windows Updates that nothing in the dashboard would load but that now seems fine.

I've started initializing the array using the Intel Rapid Storage program, after around 12hours it's 13% complete. Writing to the array atm though is absolutely awful, I've seen rights occasionally hit 15mb/s but mostly it's around 600k!! Hoping it sorts itself out once the array is fully initialized.

Ohh you are building this array on the onboard controller? I don't have any experience with ICH10R and EFI but you may still be held to the 2tb. Go get yourself a hardware controller and you will be much happier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is not WHS 2011 or motherboard. WHS 2011 works with UEFI and GPT partitions

The EFI bootloader is present on the WHS 2011 DVD [bootmgr.efi file], we only have to take care that the motherboard really does load it and not the standard mbr bootloader (bootmgr file). Some motherboard, for example my Intel DG45FC, only boots the efi bootmanager if booted from a DVD, from an USB Stick he can't.

But anyway it's not the problem.

The problem comes from the Intel chipset drivers. Currently they don't accept to install a bootable partition that is bigger than 2TB in RAID mode even with UEFI.

Currently UEFI + bootable partition bigger than 2TB only works in IDE or AHCI mode with Intel driver, it may work in raid mode in the future with new drivers but currently it is not possible.

I think in Raid mode but OS HDD in single member may works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My Intel DG43GT supports "UEFI boot" from the BIOS options, but I was never able to run the EFI bootloader from the DVD, I presume because I didn't actually have an EFI shell to run from the mainboard to actually choose the EFI bootloader rather than the standard one. Even when I brought up a command prmopt in Win7 and preformatted the HDD as GPT rather than MBR, the WHS 2011 install process just reinitialized the disk as MBR anyway.

ICH10-based southbridge I think supports > 2.2TB volumes if you're using the RST driver version 10.1 and above...maybe only 10.5.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now



Upgrade to a WGS Supporter Account to remove this ad.



  • Posts

    • Yeah, mine stopped working also, but this time the communicator would allow connection to the server.
      But the automated backups were not occurring. I had to re-setup the folders associated with the computer "Customize Backup For This Computer" and then the automated backups worked again. Apparently there is an option for an anniversary clean install. Then install the connector.
      I think that would be the best option. But definitely a pain in the butt. Let us know how it goes.
      Shane
      Sydney, Australia      
    • Depends on what your storage requirements are going to be.   I personally favor RAID-10 (mirrored stripe) arrays because of the lack of a need for parity, but it's not particularly storage efficient, and with your current setup, you'd have only 4TBs (3.63TiBs) of storage space available (half of an 8TB stripe due to mirroring), in which a minimum 160GBs of that 4TBs is used for the C: drive if you partition the volume during installation. WIth 4 disks, you could do RAID-5, which would give you 6TBs (5.4TiBs) of storage space (because 2TBs is used for RAID stripe parity), but then there's the parity performance penalty and the higher risk of an unrecoverable read error (URE) killing your array and losing your data if you're not using enterprise drives.   ...or you could try Storage Spaces, I guess.
    • RODCs only work with "active" services like DHCP when the RWDC (your DC) is still active.  If the RODC can't get the information from the RWDC, then the DHCP service stops on the RODC.   The problem is, since the RODC is read-only, it can't write back the DHCP lease information to AD, especially if your only read-write domain controller is down.   DNS and Global Catalog (AD authentication) works as long as clients are only reading from it, but DNS changes won't update if a client's only DNS server is a RODC.   AD best-practices is to have a minimum of two RWDCs for any domain (which Microsoft itself doesn't follow with the Essentials product in the first place), so that you have another writable domain controller that can update information in the event the primary goes offline.
    • That's not how WAN uplinks work.  Except for very specific circumstances*, you won't be able to aggregate separate WAN links into one large WAN "pipe" with combined bandwidth to a single destination.  TCP/IP doesn't work that way, and even in the event you somehow jury rig half of an IMUX'ed (inversely multiplexed) connection with three very different WAN connections, most intelligent security devices on the public Internet will simply reject TCP [SYN,ACKs] they never received an initial TCP [SYN] from -- asymmetric routing will just be outright rejected.   Most smart security devices can support multiple WAN connections (usually two with a third as a warm spare backup), but done in such a way that there's a defined primary connection, a designated backup/failover connection...or done in such a way that each outgoing connection uses a separate WAN link, or in an active/backup/cellular failover or active/active/cellular failover configuration in the case of Cisco's Meraki hardware   To illustrate how it'd work, say you have three connections:  LTE-1, LTE-2 and ADSL.  So you have Netflix open.  That connection to Netflix is only going to take a single path (LTE-1), since each path has its own public IP address.  If you then decide to go to YouTube in a new browser tab, that YouTube connection may take a separate path (LTE-2), depending on how you have the uplinks configured.  Then you decide to stream Pandora from a third browser tab -- that Pandora stream may also take the last path available (ADSL), but each media stream will still be limited to the bandwidth of the path it's taken and won't be aggregated to a single connection equaling the sum of all three WAN uplinks.   *The only scenario in which WAN aggregation works as a combined WAN "pipe" is if you have a single ISP that can terminate a group of identical media types between you and their edge before going out to the Internet -- such as a group of DS1, DS3 or IMA (Inverse Multiplexing over ATM) connections from your edge device to their first hop edge.  In that scenario, the WAN bundle is only going between you and your ISP, but that requires ISP support, additional ISP-provided hardware, and is usually VERY EXPENSIVE to implement for a home user.
    • I've been thinking about using W10 as my server recently.  MS has pretty much killed the home server market via pricing and poor support like the issue you ran into.  Essentials is an after thought for MS. The one thing that keeps me from moving to W10 is the remote access piece, but since that is not a requirement for you, I'd suggest W10.
  • Popular Contributors