Update Your Home Servers – KB950193 Is Here

By on September 24, 2008 in Windows Home Server

Microsoft this week released a new Windows Home Server patch, KB950193 which fixes an issue discovered in Power Pack 1.

The issue occurs if a hard drive on the home server is improperly removed by the user (i.e. if it is physically removed without using the “Remove a Hard Drive Wizard” first) or if the hard drive suffers a hardware failure. In these situations, files in Shared Folders with folder duplication enabled may not be recoverable.

The fix will be issued today via Windows Update – those of you with Automatic Updates switched on will receive this update automatically. The rest of you will need to run Windows Update manually from the Windows Home Server Console. My advice is to go and do that now. Then switch on Automatic Updates.

More information on the fix can be found at microsoft.com.

More info: Microsoft Knowledge Base


Enjoyed this post? Share it.

If you enjoyed reading this post, then why not share it with your friends and followers?

About Terry Walsh

Terry Walsh is the founding editor and owner of We Got Served. Since February 2007, the site has provided detailed coverage and analysis of the emerging home server category, and has subsequently grown into a trusted outlet for digital home news and reviews.
View all posts by Terry Walsh →

Sign Up for WGS Daily News

If you don't want to miss out on the latest news from We Got Served, why not subscribe to our daily digest? You'll get the day's headlines and a short summary of each news item delivered straight to your inbox each morning.

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

  • ViRGE

    How on Earth did they not catch this bug in the entire time PP1 was in beta testing? The KB article makes it sound like this problem is more or less guaranteed to happen.

  • soaklord

    I agree with Virge, how was this not discovered sooner? What you are saying is that if I choose to duplicate folders, I could lose the data? Wasn’t the whole point of folder duplication to *prevent* that very scenario? A feature that does EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE of what it was designed to do should probably be discovered sooner than this. The whole reason I bought my home server was to get some redundancy of files as I lost a hard drive that contained gigabytes of pictures and art that weren’t backed up.

  • robert welshe

    Stop whinging. There will always be bugs of some kind in any software. The only issue is whether there is ongoing support to make corrections and improvements. The bug has been identified and hopefully fixed.

  • soaklord

    Robert,

    Since discovering WHS, I have become a HUGE fan. At the time, I was looking at NAS boxes such as the Buffalo, etc. WHS more than met my needs and got me to dream of doing things that caused no end of headaches in Linux. To say I am whinging is not necessarily a fair assessment. However, if you bought a hard drive only to find out that using the hard drive might cause you to lose any information you store on that drive, would you be mildly upset? I am very happy that the problem is now solved, but it only reinforces my thinking that the only safe data is the data you have stored across multiple platforms and locations.

  • Tim

    My guess is that no one tested removing a hard drive without using the Remove wizard, and no one had (or simulated) a HD failure. The bug appears to only be “guaranteed” to happen if you don’t follow directions or if a HD physically fails.

    I just removed a 250GB drive from my WHS using the Remove Wizard and had no problems whatsoever so the bug doesn’t seem to happen if you just replace a drive due to non-critical issues. In my case I replaced a 250GB drive with a 1TB drive; the old drive was fine but I wanted more space.

    So yes, if you enable duplication, and you remove a hard drive without using the Remove wizard to make sure the files are safe, you may/will lose files. And if you enable duplication and a drive fails, you may/will lose files. On the other hand, if you don’t enable duplication and a drive fails, you absolutely positively will lose all of the files on that drive.

    Any time you store files on any sort of medium, you have a chance to lose those files. It’s inherent in the nature of the media. You’re almost right – the only way to minimize losing data is to back it up on multiple destinations in multiple locations. There is NO way to absolutely prevent data loss.

    All backups are only as safe as the weakest link in the chain. The chain includes the source media, the source system, the method used to create backups, the method and system(s) used to store those backups, and the system used to actually run the backup process (which in most cases means the user remembering to run a backup.)

    Even keeping backups offsite isn’t guaranteed to be safe; data centers can be broken into or have disc failures just like normal systems.

  • http://www.worldspreads.com Simon Clark

    I have installed a useful piece of software on my Tranquil home server called Karen’s Replicator.
    I have no connection with the author or site so I don’t believe this posting constitutes a promotion, merely a recommendation. I also lost a lot of data about 6 months ago, and that’s why I got the Tranquil server. But I’ve also got a Buffalo NAS and some USB disks lying around, so I’m using this Replicator software to keep image backups of my home server folders on the NAS, and it just works. The only thing to bear in mind is to use the WHS share names when accessing the local data, and not things like C: and D: etc.

    http://www.karenware.com/powertools/ptreplicator.asp

    http://www.karenware.com/powertools/ptreplicator.asp

  • http://blog.szuta.com Boggy

    Originally Posted By soaklordRobert,

    Since discovering WHS, I have become a HUGE fan. At the time, I was looking at NAS boxes such as the Buffalo, etc. WHS more than met my needs and got me to dream of doing things that caused no end of headaches in Linux. To say I am whinging is not necessarily a fair assessment. However, if you bought a hard drive only to find out that using the hard drive might cause you to lose any information you store on that drive, would you be mildly upset? I am very happy that the problem is now solved, but it only reinforces my thinking that the only safe data is the data you have stored across multiple platforms and locations.

    I am with YOU on this one. Whining has NOTHING to do with your complaint. Being a huge fan of WHS, I have exactly the same “beaf” with MS.

  • ViRGE

    @Tim – You make a good point, though I do think you’re being too kind about the situation. To take your examples, WHS isn’t there to protect your data if your whole house burns down taking the server with it. That’s a failure scenario not covered by the OS’s specifications and everyone should be aware of this. But what is covered by the specifications is that in the case of a single drive failure, the integrity of all files covered by folder duplication should be maintained. They should exist as a copy on another, still-working drive. This is what folder duplication is for, this is what the OS is specified to offer.

    “You may/will lose files” is not acceptable when using folder duplication and you experience a single drive failure.

    WHS is a great product, but these data integrity issues are getting tiresome.

  • Pete Iber

    During PP1 beta I removed drives many times, but I never tried to remove them without using the wizard. Thus, as I am sure many of my co testers we didn’t discover the bug. Also I have never personally had a drive fail on me. Again, it would take that particular action to happen to find the bug. It just is good we now have an update to correct it.

  • duke748

    This bug has been registered on connect for a few weeks. Saw it reported in the MS forums so it’s a pretty quick turnaround for a bugfix

  • RB 1

    This should of been found before the release of PP1. Sorry but it should not require beta testers to discover this. Surely in house testing would of tried or simulated removal/failure of a hard drive with PP1 and even without it. Its not good!

    I love WHS and MCE along with technologies and applications around them, I have been reccomending WHS to family and friends since PP1… but Come the release od the next WHS platform I will NOT be purchasing it untill it has been out for a long while and fully tested… because i simply will not trust it until it has been fully tested/proven.

    Rick.

  • Carlos

    Well, wish I had this update a week ago when my drive died, I lost so much data. I guess that I should have made a backup of a backup… this seems a bit too advanced for the home users that they are trying to sell WHS to, I thought that because my data was duplicated it was somewhat safe, now I dont trust WHS to do any more that just file server, and I could have done that with linux for FREE! Microsoft really let the ball drop with this one, and I would never recommend Windows Home Server.

  • tbever

    I just got a message that one of my WD 1 GB hard drives failed. I plan to try to remove it today but reading this thread just gave me that sinking feeling. How does a hard drive fail when it’s less than a year old? Damn.

  • Carlos

    My drive was a Western Digital also a WD5000SY, it died young too.

  • nupi

    @robert welshe – I’d like to see how you’d react if you had lost data due to this bug.

    The test scenario of improperly removing a hard drive should be one of the first and most important tests that is run before any update is released.

    “improper removal” of a hardrive is one of the most common things that will happen. This ‘improper removal’ can happen either by:
    1) Hard drive failure (the one thing folder duplication is supposed to save you from)
    2) Hard drive power loss, be it internal or external…yes power connectors do come loose.
    3) Human error… there is always the chance you’ll swap out the wrong drive.

    So think before you talk next time.

  • tbever

    Happy day. My windows update was turned on and it installed the bug fix just before my 1 gb drive failed. Fortunately after leaving the drive off for 12 hrs I was able to get it running again long enough to remove it using the wizard (I have another 1 gb and another 500 gb drive installed) with no problems. I am not sure what would have happened if the drive did not come back up temporarily though, I would have lost some data that was not duplicated I presume. WD warranty is good for 3 years and I just had to enter the serial number to get an RMA. I am a bit disturbed about the reliability of the drive. I I believe it was the WD “green version” 10EACS or similar.

  • Simon Clark

    First of all, I would point out to everyone who is relating a horror story about data loss that you have my sympathy as I’ve been there myself. However I will make a couple more points:
    1) WHS is server software and it should be installed and used on and with server-grade hardware. That doesn’t include the huge majority of disk drives out there, most of which now only come with a 12 month warranty.
    2) It is a server as I said and all servers must be backed up. What to is your choice. My earlier posting described a solution that works for me. I’m not sure if anyone has attached a tape drive to their server yet but it should work. Is this why Microsoft put the option into PP1 to allow an external drive to be used for backup ?

    It is basically reckless and foolhardy to assume that you because you have a WHS system on your network that is the only place you keep your critical files.