Windows 10 Storage Spaces move to another pc?

[Lurchj]

I've got a Windows 10 storage spaces array of 4-8tb drives in my PC. I've got about 25tb data on the drives. I also have these drives attached through an PCIE to SATA 4 port card. I am looking to upgrade my processor and motherboard. Does anyone know if I can just hook the drives up to the new board and keep all my files? The drives would be attached to the new motherboard directly. Any help would be very helpful.

 

Thanks

[jake765111]

 

 

 

2

4 minutes ago, Lurchj said:

I've got a Windows 10 storage spaces array of 4-8tb drives in my PC. I've got about 25tb data on the drives. I also have these drives attached through an PCIE to SATA 4 port card. I am looking to upgrade my processor and motherboard. Does anyone know if I can just hook the drives up to the new board and keep all my files? The drives would be attached to the new motherboard directly. Any help would be very helpful.

 

Thanks

As long as the SATA card is supported and the files are not encrypted it should be fine

[SupaKomputa]

Do you have windows inside these array?

If yes, then i suggest you have a dedicated windows drive which you will install fresh windows without messing with the array.

After the windows installed, you can connect them, no problem.

[jake765111]

1 minute ago, SupaKomputa said:

Do you have windows inside these array?

If yes, then i suggest you have a dedicated windows drive which you will install fresh windows without messing with the array.

After the windows installed, you can connect them, no problem.

Yes. The other data drive's should be fine though. Just keep a backup in case something end up going bad

[Lurchj]

I have my window 10 on it's own ssd. Also the SATA card is supported on the new board. 

[Lurchj]

The only problem is having a back up.. I don't have a spare 25tb of space... haha not many do.  Thats why I have it in an Raid 5 so I have a little redundancy. 

[SupaKomputa]

4 hours ago, Lurchj said:

I have my window 10 on it's own ssd. Also the SATA card is supported on the new board. 

Good then, just install it.

4 hours ago, Lurchj said:

The only problem is having a back up.. I don't have a spare 25tb of space... haha not many do.  Thats why I have it in an Raid 5 so I have a little redundancy. 

Why you need to back it up?

I see no reason why it should fail in the new system.

[Lady Fitzgerald]

5 hours ago, SupaKomputa said:

Good then, just install it.

Why you need to back it up?

I see no reason why it should fail in the new system.

I see no reason why he shouldn't! Stuff happens. Any form of data storage can fail irrecoverably without any notice. The only way to reasonably ensure data safety is for it to exist in three separate places, such as on a computer, on an onsite backup drive, and an offsite backup drive. For a backup to be a true backup, it must be kept powered down, disconnected from the computer, and stored away from the computer.

 

Redundancy will only protect from drive failure (up to a point). Drive failure is not the only way data can be lost. Viruses and other malware, rain, floods, fire, theft, clumsiness (such as dropping computers or drives), user error (such as accidental deletion), etc. are just some of what can cause data loss.

 

When one budgets for drive purchases, additional drives for backups should also be included in the equation.

[SupaKomputa]

5 hours ago, Lady Fitzgerald said:

Redundancy will only protect from drive failure (up to a point). Drive failure is not the only way data can be lost. Viruses and other malware, rain, floods, fire, theft, clumsiness (such as dropping computers or drives), user error (such as accidental deletion), etc. are just some of what can cause data loss.

You're being paranoid, it's a software raid 5, it should work on the new system.

Or do you suggest him to buy 25gb of hdd to offload the array?

[Lady Fitzgerald]

6 hours ago, SupaKomputa said:

You're being paranoid, it's a software raid 5, it should work on the new system...

No, I'm not being paranoid; I'm being realistic. First, RAID is redundancy only (it is NOT a backup!) and, in the case of RAID 5, will protect only from 1 drive failing. If a second drive should fail before the first one is replaced and rebuilt, all the data will be history. And, as I pointed out earlier, drive failure is not the only way to lose data. Computer forums are littered with post from people who lost data to drive failures and other causes of data loss that I mentioned that could have been prevented by having up to date backups. I've had backups save some of my data more than once (I've never lost any data).

 

 

6 hours ago, SupaKomputa said:

...Or do you suggest him to buy 25gb of hdd to offload the array?

Actually, if he wants to properly protect all his data, he needs to buy 50TB of drives; 25TB for an onsite backup and 25TB for an offsite backup.

 

If Lurchj can't afford even 25TB of drives for a single backup, then he needs to decide what data he has he can afford to lose if something goes sideways, then copy the data he can't afford to lose onto drives he can afford until he can afford more. Again, when budgeting to buy dries, one should budget for three drives (I'll admit to being paranoid in that I budget for five drives: the one going into the computer, two for onsite backups, and two for offsite backups).

 

One reason I do NOT recommend RAID for most people is the problem of maintaining backups of a volume that is larger than any avaiable drive (an exception would be, say, a business that absolutely needs to maintain continuous access to a computer's data even if a drive dies; even then, the RAID would still need to be backed up). Unless one arranges a large volume of data, such as 25TB, into folders or partitions (normally, I do not recommend partitioning for organizing data but this would be one exception) that will fit individually onto multiple single backup drives, allowing the use of folder/file syncing for making and maintaining the backups (and that can get complicated in a hurry, depending on the folder structure), one generally would require additional RAIDs to backup the first RAID (and that is really expensive right from the word go).

 

Most people simply do not need to have a computer that will continue to run if a drive dies. It's convenient but not absolutely necessary. Most people will survive just fine having a computer that is down or crippled until a drive can be replaced and the data restored. I keep a spare drive of each size and type I have in use on hand so I don't have to scramble to get a replacement if one dies. Since I keep more than the minimum number of backups for each drive, I can be up and running in minutes instead of hours simply by swapping in one of the extra backups, then use the computer while I'm repopulating the replacement backup drive and order a replacement for the replacement (I live in a megalopolis yet I have to order pretty much everything online, especially my 4TB and 2TB SSDs  ).

 

For the same reasons, most people do not need a NAS unless multiple computers need to access the same data (even then, the NAS would need to be backed up)