NETGEAR is aware of a growing number of phone and online scams. To learn how to stay safe click here.
Forum Discussion
Solved
Why is Volume Size below calculated?
Hi, I just had to rebuild a chassis (EDA500) from scratch. I did the following: 1. Powered down. 2. Removed drives 3. Deleted partitions 4. Inserted drives 5. Powered on 6. Selected new...
- That's fine.
If you don't have any unused drive in the chassis and only one volume per chassis, then turn on X-RAID, and your volume should expand (vertical expansion).
The difference come from confusing decimal and binary prefixes. Harddisk manufactures prefer decimal, your NAS is using binary.
| Prefixes for multiples of bits (bit) or bytes (B)
|
Retired_Member wrote:
The difference come from confusing decimal and binary prefixes. Harddisk manufactures prefer decimal, your NAS is using binary.
Windows also uses binary (TiB).
teddyb wrote:
However, I did 8-8-6-6-6 TB WD Red drives and the interface says total size of 21.81 TB versus 23.157 TB calculated. My DATA volume has a similar problem with 8-8-8-8-8-6 and 32.72 TB versus 33.848 calculated.
Try entering 21.81 TiB in TB into google search, it will convert the units for you. You should see 23.98 TB
Similarly entering 32.72 TiB in TB will give you 35.98 TiB
Can you check that you typed the disk configuration info correctly? With XRAID single redundancy you should be getting 26TB and 38TB. Dual redundancy would be 16 TB and 30 TB.
The configurations are correct at 8-8-8-8-8-6 and 8-8-6-6-6. Both calculate a higher expected size (kossboss calculator) than I have showing up.
Any ideas why tho?
teddyb wrote:
The configurations are correct at 8-8-8-8-8-6 and 8-8-6-6-6. Both calculate a higher expected size (kossboss calculator) than I have showing up.
I recall seeing some bugs in that calculator, but it's been a long time since I looked at it.
I can only tell you what the sizes should be with XRAID. Overhead from the OS partition, etc is negligible. The rule for single redundancy is "sum the disks and subtract the largest".
- 2x8TB+3x6TB gives you 26 TB. The NAS would show ~23.6 TiB for the volume size.
- 5x8TB+1x6TB gives you 38 TB. The NAS would show ~34.5 TiB.
It looks to me like both volumes are about 2 TB too small. What is the expansion history?
The DATA volume has steadily been upgraded from all 3s. The eda500 is a brand new build after starting over with it.
Both are RAID5 configured.
Yes, it seems they are both over nearly 2 TB too small, while i have another eda with all 3 TB drives and it is right on estimate.
NETGEAR Academy
Boost your skills with the Netgear Academy - Get trained, certified and stay ahead with the latest Netgear technology!
Join Us!
