Win 7 RAID, Server AV, mobile profiles... Questions...

[Calab]

I have a few questions and I don't see any groups that refer to Windows 7,
or that are relevant to my roaming profile question, so please excuse the
crossposting. I am watch all groups for any replies...

We have four users in our home and three computers. These computers run
Vista Premium 64bit, Windows 7 RC 64bit and Windows 2003 Server 32bit. All
are legit with proper licensing, etc. These computers are shared, so anyone
could be sitting at any computer. We may be adding a fourth PC as a media
centre.

Now, my questions...

- I would love to have roaming profiles, but we don't run a domain
controller, etc. Are there alternatives to this? I simply want to sit at any
PC, log in, and have my documents, start menu, background, etc. follow me.
Is there a way to point Windows to a network drive for all my local profile
info?

- The 2003 Server is overkill for what we do. Just a file and media server,
basically. Trying to find a decent antivirus program, at a decent price,
that will run on a Server machine is difficult. What makes it worse is that
I don't want infected files moved, deleted or repaired. I just want them
renamed, adding the .vir extension. Because of this, I am considering moving
this machine to Windows 7. Does this sound reasonable?

- Since our Window 2003 machine is a file server, we have our drives in a
RAID5 array. If I move to Windows 7 will I have to lose the array or will
Windows 7 support RAID5 arrays? Will I need to rely on a hardware solution
or can Windows 7 create RAID 5 arrays like Windows 2003 can?

....so, simply put, what is the best solution to access the same desktop on
multiple machines and to serve my RAID5 files to my household?

P.S. Reposted with typo's fixed and because my last post doesn't appear to
have got onto the groups.

 

[GTS]

To 'have your documents, start menu, background, etc. follow you' requires a
roaming profile. This is ONLY supported with a domain server and domain
worker workstation. Certainly you could keep your documents on a share on a
workgroup workstation, but not the rest of it.

What information I've seen to date indicates that Windows 7 does not support
RAID 5.

Per what you've said, I don't see much benefit to changing your server to
Windows 7. Clam Antivirus (thought it doesn't have a real time scanner)
will support it.

 

[Ace Fekay [MCT]]

I have a few questions and I don't see any groups that refer to Windows 7,
or that are relevant to my roaming profile question, so please excuse the
crossposting. I am watch all groups for any replies...

We have four users in our home and three computers. These computers run
Vista Premium 64bit, Windows 7 RC 64bit and Windows 2003 Server 32bit. All
are legit with proper licensing, etc. These computers are shared, so
anyone could be sitting at any computer. We may be adding a fourth PC as a
media centre.

Now, my questions...

- I would love to have roaming profiles, but we don't run a domain
controller, etc. Are there alternatives to this? I simply want to sit at
any PC, log in, and have my documents, start menu, background, etc. follow
me. Is there a way to point Windows to a network drive for all my local
profile info?

- The 2003 Server is overkill for what we do. Just a file and media
server, basically. Trying to find a decent antivirus program, at a decent
price, that will run on a Server machine is difficult. What makes it worse
is that I don't want infected files moved, deleted or repaired. I just
want them renamed, adding the .vir extension. Because of this, I am
considering moving this machine to Windows 7. Does this sound reasonable?

- Since our Window 2003 machine is a file server, we have our drives in a
RAID5 array. If I move to Windows 7 will I have to lose the array or will
Windows 7 support RAID5 arrays? Will I need to rely on a hardware solution
or can Windows 7 create RAID 5 arrays like Windows 2003 can?

...so, simply put, what is the best solution to access the same desktop on
multiple machines and to serve my RAID5 files to my household?

P.S. Reposted with typo's fixed and because my last post doesn't appear to
have got onto the groups.

It's not quite the same without a domain. GTS provided some info for you.
You can test it, however, without a domain. Perform the following to set it
up and see how it works. However note - I've never did this with a workgroup
environment. And keep in mind, if the server's down, or the workstation has
no connectivity, there may be problems. You simply have to try it and test
it. I would be curious if it worked. Also note that with workgroup UNC and
mapped drives, they have a habit of disconnecting, and may be an issue.

The ideal solution is of course, an AD domain, however if you are not
extremely versed in AD, this would complicate matters on your part greatly,
for AD is not a simple feature to learn by any level of imagination, for it
requires complete understanding of other features and protocols, such as
DNS, TCPIP, etc. And trying to help someone build a domain from scratch
through newsgroup post, can wind up being a monumental task.

Perform the following, and test it.

1. Create identical user accounts and passwords as the user accounts that
logon to each machine, as well as on the 2003 server.. If folks will be
moving from machine to machine, you must create identical usernames and
passwords on each machine.

2. On the 2003 server, create a parent folder, called Users, and share it
out, and make the Share Permissions and NTFS (Security tab) permissions both
with Authenticated Users Full Control and Administrators Full Control.

3. Create subfolders, one for each individual user account matching the
usernames. In each individual folder, change the NTFS permissions so they
reflect Administrators Full Control a,d the individual user account name
asociated to that folder with Full Control. Remove Users, Authenticated
Users and Everyone, if they are in there.

4 On each machine's local user accounts, for each user, specify the UNC to
the share in their account properties, profile tab, profile path. Example:
For user1, it would be \\The2003ServerName\user1.

5. On a workstation, logoff, and then logon again with a test user account.
See if it works.


As GST mentioned about RAID5, nope. Windows 7 is a workstation operating
system, not a server. RAID5 is a server feature. If you need RAID5, whether
Windows 7 supports it or not, or any other operating system for that matter,
I would highly suggest to purchase an LSI or Adaptec controller with RAID5
support for the type of drives in the machine. Everything will be controlled
through the controller and installable management software. It relieves the
operating system of the 10% - 15% performance hit running the RAID services.

--
Ace

This posting is provided "AS-IS" with no warranties or guarantees and
confers no rights.

Please reply back to the newsgroup or forum to benefit from collaboration
among responding engineers, and to help others benefit from your resolution.

Ace Fekay, MCT, MCTS Exchange, MCSE, MCSA 2003 & 2000, MCSA Messaging
Microsoft Certified Trainer

For urgent issues, please contact Microsoft PSS directly. Please check
http://support.microsoft.com for regional support phone numbers.

 

[Jim in Arizona]

It relieves the

operating system of the 10% - 15% performance hit running the RAID
services.

I always wondered what the typical performance hit would be when running any
RAID via the OS compared to hardware. That's a little higher than I thought
but, of course, I can imagine it depends on how impressive the computer
hardware is that the OS runs on.

Thanks Ace.

 

[Ace Fekay [MCT]]

It relieves the

I always wondered what the typical performance hit would be when running
any RAID via the OS compared to hardware. That's a little higher than I
thought but, of course, I can imagine it depends on how impressive the
computer hardware is that the OS runs on.

Thanks Ace.

I had one customer using a Dell DC with Windows Raid 1. After a couple of
years and adding an additional DC, I put in a Dell Perc4, and reinstalled
the OS. You wouldn't believe the difference in response. Besides the OS hit,
the controller has a onboard cache that greatly helps with performance. So
it's more than just an OS thing.



Ace