dfs experiences

  • Thread starter Thread starter steve
  • Start date Start date
S

steve

Hi all

We are considering using DFS in our Win2K environment to distribute data
among differente file servers instead of keeping everything on the same box.

What are your experiences on this? Is it going to work? Is DFS reliable?
Are there any case studies of DFS use out there?

Thanks

steve
 
FRS is responsible for maintaining up to date replicas of the data.
DFS only provides the abstacted namespace and facilitates control over the
replication topology.

FRS works great for relatively static datasets. Highly reliable when setup
properly.
FRS beings to suffer from design limitations as the dataset becomes larger
and more importantly more dynamic (file churn).

FRS is a sensitive beast and a major pain to troubleshoot when something
goes wrong.
With careful planning and monitoring (using ultrasound) you can implement
and sustain a reliable replica set.

I suggest you dig into the technical ref for both DFS and FRS before
deploying these technologies.

http://www.microsoft.com/resources/...v/2003/all/techref/en-us/w2k3tr_dfs_intro.asp
http://www.microsoft.com/resources/...v/2003/all/techref/en-us/w2k3tr_frs_intro.asp

I have had many experiences setting up DFS/FRS, and troubleshooting it.
DFS is great, however I have a love hate relationship with FRS.
 
Hi Glenn

Thanks for your answer.

I think you are making reference to DFS and FRS in Windows Server 2003.

We do not have 2003, we have 2000. My understanding is that DFS was made
better in 2003 but what about 2000? Is it reliable and does anybody have
experiences on it?.

Thanks

Steve
 
Back
Top