There are two distinct issues here - having multiple instances of the same data for redundancy/fault tolerance, and splitting the data among 4 servers for a type of load balancing. I think the latter was the primary goal, is that right Jennifer? You just don't want 1 tb on a single server? Yes with DFS you can just split it up and have your 250 GB on each. That keeps you from having all 1000 GB of your files go away if one server dies, and you'll probably get better response times for your file access. You can set certain folders to replicate but not replicate the whole thing of course, and those folders you designate as having multiple sources and you'll achieve true load balancing and redundancy for that 20 Mb or so. The main concern, as I understand it, with the replicated folders is if people are liable to modify the same files on different servers at the same time or before replication occurs if it's not immediate. Some data lends itself well to redundancy (frequently used CD images etc) and some things don't do as well - home directories for sure, and departmental directories depending on how they're used. At least that's my opinion from how I've understood it.
Rich Milburn MCSE, Microsoft MVP - Directory Services Sr Network Analyst, Field Platform Development Applebee's International, Inc. 4551 W. 107th St Overland Park, KS 66207 913-967-2819 -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jennifer Fountain Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2004 4:05 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] DFS I was only thinking about replication between two servers and the data would be small. Maybe 20 mb here and there - as files are updated. Kind Regards, Jennifer Fountain R&B Inc 3400 E Walnut Street Colmar, PA 18915 > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Bruce Clingaman > Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2004 4:12 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] DFS > > > 1 TB is too much for DFS to replicate between two servers, > not to mention four. The replication (FRS) in DFS is flawed. > Have you looked into shadow copy or a utility like Robocopy? > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Jennifer Fountain > Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2004 1:45 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] DFS > > The main objective to to remove the single point of failure I > have now - one big file server. If this goes down, we are > SOL. From what I read/tested, DFS will allow you to point a > single folder to shares on different physical locations. > (basically, the user sees one server but in reality I have four) > > Replication is also something I could take advantage of; > However, can you schedule replication in DFS? > > Kind Regards, > > Jennifer Fountain > R&B Inc > 3400 E Walnut Street > Colmar, PA 18915 > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Depp, Dennis > > M. > > Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2004 1:59 PM > > To: Salandra, Justin A.; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] DFS > > > > Justin, > > > > I don't think this is correct. With DFS, I can set up different > > subfolders to point to different physical locations. These > physical > > locations can be setup a redundant pairs, but this is not required. > > > > Denny > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: "Salandra, Justin A." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: 5/11/04 1:41:37 PM > > To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] DFS > > > > Having a DFS structure would mean that you would have 4 servers > > each with 1 TB of information on them because everything gets > > replicated to all locations in the DFS. DFS will NOT put 250 GB on > > one server, 250 GB on another server and so on. > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Rutherford, > > Robert > > Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2004 10:54 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] DFS > > Sensitivity: Private > > > > > > > > > > > > You can install a DFS root on a DC or member server. > > > > > > > > It should work fine, in terms of splitting down a server and > > distributing the data over a number of other servers. I'm > assuming you > > only want to use DFS to make a central share access hierarchy? > > > > > > > > I would not use the replication side of it though as it's > > inherently flawed... well it was on 2000 and have read it hasn't > > changed that significantly on 2k3. If you do want to use the > > replication then I would only use it for read only data, i.e. > > Application distribution points. > > > > > > > > BR, > > > > > > > > Rob > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Jennifer Fountain [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: 11 May 2004 14:47 > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: [ActiveDir] DFS > > Sensitivity: Private > > > > Does anyone here use DFS? If so, do you use it > for load > > balancing? Did you install it on a DC? It's own server? > > We are looking into breaking our one huge file server (1 > tb of space) > > into 4 smaller servers (more manageable and wanted to look into DFS. > > We do have NT/95 clients but that should not stop me because I can > > install the AD client on them. > > > > Thanks for any info! > > > > > > > > Kind Regards, > > > > Jennifer Fountain > > R&B Inc > > 3400 E Walnut Street > > Colmar, PA 18915 > > > > > > The information transmitted is intended only for the person or > > entity > > to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or > > privileged material. Any use (including retransmission > or copying) > > of this information by persons or entities other than > the intended > > recipient is prohibited. If you are not the intended > recipient of > > this > > transmission, please contact the sender and delete the material > > from any computer. The sender is not responsible for the > > completeness or accuracy of this communication as it has been > > transmitted over a public network. Any replies to this > email may > > be > > monitored by the MCPS-PRS Alliance for quality control > and other > > purposes. > > > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm > > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm > > List archive: > > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ > > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm > List archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm > List archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ > List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ -------APPLEBEE'S INTERNATIONAL, INC. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE------- PRIVILEGED / CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION may be contained in this message or any attachments. This information is strictly confidential and may be subject to attorney-client privilege. This message is intended only for the use of the named addressee. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, unauthorized forwarding, printing, copying, distribution, or using such information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this in error, you should kindly notify the sender by reply e-mail and immediately destroy this message. Unauthorized interception of this e-mail is a violation of federal criminal law. Applebee's International, Inc. reserves the right to monitor and review the content of all messages sent to and from this e-mail address. Messages sent to or from this e-mail address may be stored on the Applebee's International, Inc. e-mail system. List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
