Free Space different

[birtha]

Having a problem showing correct free space.
Have 2 vm's, same network, both windows 2008 R2, both using StarWind iSCSI Initiator 5.5 connected to the same (Thecus) nas box. One server shows 1.43TB/5.17TB free, the other showing 86.8GB/5.17TB free. How can I fix this?

I did a search on your forum for 'free space' and found that version 5.6 has some improvements, one w/a GUI for total disk space. http://www.starwindsoftware.com/forums/post12643.html?hilit=free%20space#p12643 I downloaded and installed what I thought was version 5.6. Server is still showing 5.5. I did not uninstall because post said "previous versions can be updated by installing this version over existing installation."
Please help. I'm afraid my backups are going to fail tonight because I may or may not be running out of space.
Thanks

[Anatoly (staff)]

Greeting birtha

First of all - what have you ment by saying "StarWind iSCSI Initiator 5.5"? StarPort or Microsoft initiator?
Could you please clarify what version of StarWind Server are you using and where it was installed in your system?

[birtha]

Anatoly,
The 'about' from the software says "About StarWind iSCSI Initiator 5.5 Build 0x20100903." The download for this product is here http://www.starwindsoftware.com/iscsi-initiator
Does this answer your questions? I'm using this instead of microsoft's initiator because it can't see more than 2 TB's.

[anton (staff)]

You're posting to the wrong forum and confusing support staff. I'll move this thread to the place it really belongs.

First set of numbers seems to be correct. Second set seems to have a pretty classic truncation of 64-bit value to 32-bit. I'm not sure it's something inside our driver so let's start from the different place. Go to Disk Management and tell us raw volume sizes you see there. The ones controlled by our initiator of course. Partitioned and unpartitioned space. In GB please.

Thanks!

[birtha]

Anton,
Really sorry about posting in the wrong forum. (Don't do this much).

Here's the info from each of the 2 servers, both showing healthy (Primary Partition).
Server 19: iSCSI Capacity: 5301.37 GB, Used: 5247.82 GB, Free: 53.55 GB
Server 20: iSCSI Capacity: 5301.37 GB, Used: 3835.87 GB, Free: 1465.5 GB

Both servers are connected to the same nas - Thecus N5200PRO

[anton (staff)]

1) That's no problem at all. Just tried to tell why you've got delayed response

2) Hold on for a second... Do you mean you have TWO targets configured on Thecus box or do you mean your both servers connect to the same iSCSI target device?

Anton,
Really sorry about posting in the wrong forum. (Don't do this much).

Here's the info from each of the 2 servers, both showing healthy (Primary Partition).
Server 19: iSCSI Capacity: 5301.37 GB, Used: 5247.82 GB, Free: 53.55 GB
Server 20: iSCSI Capacity: 5301.37 GB, Used: 3835.87 GB, Free: 1465.5 GB

Both servers are connected to the same nas - Thecus N5200PRO

[birtha]

Anton,
I resolved the problem. Back to basics. One server I rebooted a few times. This was the server showing less available space. The other server, showing more available space, I neglected to reboot. Rebooting solved the problem. It's just a little strange that one server updates the amount of available disc space as files are added/deleted, while the other server needs a reboot to show the correct available disc space. Remember, both of these servers are connected, via Starwind, to the same physical box. Weird.

Thanks!

[anton (staff)]

No you did not. You're actually much deeper in trouble then you think. Please read this thread:

starwind-f5/trying-clear-this-use-iscsi-instead-smb-t1392.html

As it's *EXACTLY* your case.

P.S. And I've been asking you are you using THE SAME target to connect to from your both initiator machines or not. There was exact reason to know

[birtha]

Oh geez. I see and understand. I'm going to put both application on the same server and kill the other server. Then only utilizing one iSCSI connection.
And yes, I was trying to access the same target with 2 different servers.
Thanks for the help, Anton!

[anton (staff)]

Sounds like a plan. I do not understand however why you need SAN in such a case. NAS with CIFS or NFS share could work just fine and provide less complexity and more flexibility.

Oh geez. I see and understand. I'm going to put both application on the same server and kill the other server. Then only utilizing one iSCSI connection.
And yes, I was trying to access the same target with 2 different servers.
Thanks for the help, Anton!