Discussion:
DFSR Architecture Question
(too old to reply)
Pat
2009-08-23 21:25:46 UTC
Permalink
Hello,

I am looking into implementing a DFS Replication setup for a system I
administer. Depending on the time of the year, I would have as little
as 3 and as much as 9 servers needing to have about 600GB (currently,
will grow) of data replicated between them all. As it stands right
now, changes to the files can occur on any server so there wouldn't be
any authoritative node that would have all changes made on it. The
files needing replicated can be anywhere from 5KB to 7GB.

My question is what would be the most reliable and best performance
way to setting up the replication connections? Would it be best to go
with a full mesh topology where all all members replicate to each
other. Or would be better to have each member replication to two or
three other members, making sort of a circular topology but setup in a
way where no single member could would break the replication.

Thanks,
Pat
IT Staff
2009-08-24 07:48:02 UTC
Permalink
Before topolgy, plan for redundancy first.

a) if use windows 2003 r2, make sure u use windows 2003 ENTERPRISE r2 so as
to have namespace server redudancy.

b) for topology, it depends what you wish to do. Will there be a central
site that pushes updates to the rest of the machines ?
Post by Pat
Hello,
I am looking into implementing a DFS Replication setup for a system I
administer. Depending on the time of the year, I would have as little
as 3 and as much as 9 servers needing to have about 600GB (currently,
will grow) of data replicated between them all. As it stands right
now, changes to the files can occur on any server so there wouldn't be
any authoritative node that would have all changes made on it. The
files needing replicated can be anywhere from 5KB to 7GB.
My question is what would be the most reliable and best performance
way to setting up the replication connections? Would it be best to go
with a full mesh topology where all all members replicate to each
other. Or would be better to have each member replication to two or
three other members, making sort of a circular topology but setup in a
way where no single member could would break the replication.
Thanks,
Pat
Pat
2009-08-24 12:19:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by IT Staff
Before topolgy, plan for redundancy first.
a) if use windows 2003 r2, make sure u use windows 2003 ENTERPRISE r2 so as
to have namespace server redudancy.
b) for topology, it depends what you wish to do. Will there be a central
site that pushes updates to the rest of the machines ?
Post by Pat
Hello,
I am looking into implementing a DFS Replication setup for a system I
administer.  Depending on the time of the year, I would have as little
as 3 and as much as 9 servers needing to have about 600GB (currently,
will grow) of data replicated between them all.  As it stands right
now, changes to the files can occur on any server so there wouldn't be
any authoritative node that would have all changes made on it.  The
files needing replicated can be anywhere from 5KB to 7GB.
My question is what would be the most reliable and best performance
way to setting up the replication connections?  Would it be best to go
with a full mesh topology where all all members replicate to each
other.  Or would be better to have each member replication to two or
three other members, making sort of a circular topology but setup in a
way where no single member could would break the replication.
Thanks,
Pat
Pat
2009-08-24 12:27:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by IT Staff
Before topolgy, plan for redundancy first.
a) if use windows 2003 r2, make sure u use windows 2003 ENTERPRISE r2 so as
to have namespace server redudancy.
b) for topology, it depends what you wish to do. Will there be a central
site that pushes updates to the rest of the machines ?
Post by Pat
Hello,
I am looking into implementing a DFS Replication setup for a system I
administer.  Depending on the time of the year, I would have as little
as 3 and as much as 9 servers needing to have about 600GB (currently,
will grow) of data replicated between them all.  As it stands right
now, changes to the files can occur on any server so there wouldn't be
any authoritative node that would have all changes made on it.  The
files needing replicated can be anywhere from 5KB to 7GB.
My question is what would be the most reliable and best performance
way to setting up the replication connections?  Would it be best to go
with a full mesh topology where all all members replicate to each
other.  Or would be better to have each member replication to two or
three other members, making sort of a circular topology but setup in a
way where no single member could would break the replication.
Thanks,
Pat
Thanks for the reply. These will be Windows Server 2008 Enterprise
servers with in an AD at 2008 functional level. There will not be a
central site, changes can be made on any server.

Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...