Discussion:
File and print questions
(too old to reply)
Don
2007-07-25 01:39:04 UTC
Permalink
I have just been tasked with migrating a clinic which we support from
netware to windows. We currently have them setup for both edirectory
and AD with all of there file and print running on a single netware
server. They have about 500 client pc's and about half of those utilize
the file server for network storage.

So my questions are:

1. Can someone point me to a document which gives best practices for
file server requirements in the above scenario. (one server, two,
etc...) I have read some of the technet stuff, but I spend more time
clicking around than actually getting an info.

2. I would like to move away from a server centric solution, it appears
that dfs is more for remote sites. Would it be applicable with all
servers located in the home datacenter?

Thanks in advance...
Anthony
2007-07-25 15:32:10 UTC
Permalink
Don,
1) I don't really know what the best practice could say. The simplest setup
is one DC, one file and print server, and a good backup. You could have two
DC's with file and print, but I personally don't like that as it means that
a file and print administrator also needs to be a domain administrator. This
may not matter to you, and two DC's gives you more resilience. Two DC's plus
two file and print is nice if you can afford it, and if the resilience is
very important.
2) DFS gives you a namespace that is server independent. This is a good
thing regardless of sites. It enables you to move data between servers
without making changes to clients or applications.
Hope that helps,
Anthony -
http://www.airdesk.co.uk
Post by Don
I have just been tasked with migrating a clinic which we support from
netware to windows. We currently have them setup for both edirectory and
AD with all of there file and print running on a single netware server.
They have about 500 client pc's and about half of those utilize the file
server for network storage.
1. Can someone point me to a document which gives best practices for file
server requirements in the above scenario. (one server, two, etc...) I
have read some of the technet stuff, but I spend more time clicking around
than actually getting an info.
2. I would like to move away from a server centric solution, it appears
that dfs is more for remote sites. Would it be applicable with all
servers located in the home datacenter?
Thanks in advance...
Don
2007-07-25 22:08:23 UTC
Permalink
The DC's really aren't an issue, they already have two dc's several ts
servers and app servers. About two dozen windows boxes up and running,
I just need to move there file and print to windows boxes. I like the
concept of the independant name space. This is definately what I'm
looking for, but with dfs isn't there a replication latency. I may be
off base here, but I was thinking that this was used with one in the
datacenter and one at a remote site which acted as sort of a file
caching server. If both servers are in the same location, does it offer
any type of load balancing, or would it be an active/passive type
configuration?

I know I'm asking alot. I guess I'm looking for something to split up
the load without having to point different users to different servers.
Post by Anthony
Don,
1) I don't really know what the best practice could say. The simplest setup
is one DC, one file and print server, and a good backup. You could have two
DC's with file and print, but I personally don't like that as it means that
a file and print administrator also needs to be a domain administrator. This
may not matter to you, and two DC's gives you more resilience. Two DC's plus
two file and print is nice if you can afford it, and if the resilience is
very important.
2) DFS gives you a namespace that is server independent. This is a good
thing regardless of sites. It enables you to move data between servers
without making changes to clients or applications.
Hope that helps,
Anthony -
http://www.airdesk.co.uk
Post by Don
I have just been tasked with migrating a clinic which we support from
netware to windows. We currently have them setup for both edirectory and
AD with all of there file and print running on a single netware server.
They have about 500 client pc's and about half of those utilize the file
server for network storage.
1. Can someone point me to a document which gives best practices for file
server requirements in the above scenario. (one server, two, etc...) I
have read some of the technet stuff, but I spend more time clicking around
than actually getting an info.
2. I would like to move away from a server centric solution, it appears
that dfs is more for remote sites. Would it be applicable with all
servers located in the home datacenter?
Thanks in advance...
Anthony
2007-07-25 22:45:25 UTC
Permalink
OK, you are talking about two different things. The DFS Namespace gives you
independence from physical folder placement, and is a good thing. DFS
Replication replicates folders in a namespace and is optional. There is
nothing inherent in the namespace that requires or prefers to have
replicated folders.
I can't think of a benefit you would obtain by applying load balancing to
replicated file and print servers. You could build the biggest servers you
can. You could cluster them. You could split the files over more than one
physical server using a single namespace. This last one sounds like what you
are thinking of,
Hope that helps,
Anthony
http://www.airdesk.co.uk
Post by Don
The DC's really aren't an issue, they already have two dc's several ts
servers and app servers. About two dozen windows boxes up and running, I
just need to move there file and print to windows boxes. I like the
concept of the independant name space. This is definately what I'm
looking for, but with dfs isn't there a replication latency. I may be off
base here, but I was thinking that this was used with one in the
datacenter and one at a remote site which acted as sort of a file caching
server. If both servers are in the same location, does it offer any type
of load balancing, or would it be an active/passive type configuration?
I know I'm asking alot. I guess I'm looking for something to split up the
load without having to point different users to different servers.
Post by Anthony
Don,
1) I don't really know what the best practice could say. The simplest
setup is one DC, one file and print server, and a good backup. You could
have two DC's with file and print, but I personally don't like that as it
means that a file and print administrator also needs to be a domain
administrator. This may not matter to you, and two DC's gives you more
resilience. Two DC's plus two file and print is nice if you can afford
it, and if the resilience is very important.
2) DFS gives you a namespace that is server independent. This is a good
thing regardless of sites. It enables you to move data between servers
without making changes to clients or applications.
Hope that helps,
Anthony -
http://www.airdesk.co.uk
Post by Don
I have just been tasked with migrating a clinic which we support from
netware to windows. We currently have them setup for both edirectory
and AD with all of there file and print running on a single netware
server. They have about 500 client pc's and about half of those utilize
the file server for network storage.
1. Can someone point me to a document which gives best practices for
file server requirements in the above scenario. (one server, two,
etc...) I have read some of the technet stuff, but I spend more time
clicking around than actually getting an info.
2. I would like to move away from a server centric solution, it appears
that dfs is more for remote sites. Would it be applicable with all
servers located in the home datacenter?
Thanks in advance...
Don
2007-07-26 22:39:30 UTC
Permalink
I think that's it. Split the load. I appreciate your input.
Post by Anthony
OK, you are talking about two different things. The DFS Namespace gives you
independence from physical folder placement, and is a good thing. DFS
Replication replicates folders in a namespace and is optional. There is
nothing inherent in the namespace that requires or prefers to have
replicated folders.
I can't think of a benefit you would obtain by applying load balancing to
replicated file and print servers. You could build the biggest servers you
can. You could cluster them. You could split the files over more than one
physical server using a single namespace. This last one sounds like what you
are thinking of,
Hope that helps,
Anthony
http://www.airdesk.co.uk
Post by Don
The DC's really aren't an issue, they already have two dc's several ts
servers and app servers. About two dozen windows boxes up and running, I
just need to move there file and print to windows boxes. I like the
concept of the independant name space. This is definately what I'm
looking for, but with dfs isn't there a replication latency. I may be off
base here, but I was thinking that this was used with one in the
datacenter and one at a remote site which acted as sort of a file caching
server. If both servers are in the same location, does it offer any type
of load balancing, or would it be an active/passive type configuration?
I know I'm asking alot. I guess I'm looking for something to split up the
load without having to point different users to different servers.
Post by Anthony
Don,
1) I don't really know what the best practice could say. The simplest
setup is one DC, one file and print server, and a good backup. You could
have two DC's with file and print, but I personally don't like that as it
means that a file and print administrator also needs to be a domain
administrator. This may not matter to you, and two DC's gives you more
resilience. Two DC's plus two file and print is nice if you can afford
it, and if the resilience is very important.
2) DFS gives you a namespace that is server independent. This is a good
thing regardless of sites. It enables you to move data between servers
without making changes to clients or applications.
Hope that helps,
Anthony -
http://www.airdesk.co.uk
Post by Don
I have just been tasked with migrating a clinic which we support from
netware to windows. We currently have them setup for both edirectory
and AD with all of there file and print running on a single netware
server. They have about 500 client pc's and about half of those utilize
the file server for network storage.
1. Can someone point me to a document which gives best practices for
file server requirements in the above scenario. (one server, two,
etc...) I have read some of the technet stuff, but I spend more time
clicking around than actually getting an info.
2. I would like to move away from a server centric solution, it appears
that dfs is more for remote sites. Would it be applicable with all
servers located in the home datacenter?
Thanks in advance...
Anthony
2007-07-26 22:56:52 UTC
Permalink
You are very welcome
Anthony -
http://www.airdesk.co.uk
Post by Don
I think that's it. Split the load. I appreciate your input.
Post by Anthony
OK, you are talking about two different things. The DFS Namespace gives
you independence from physical folder placement, and is a good thing. DFS
Replication replicates folders in a namespace and is optional. There is
nothing inherent in the namespace that requires or prefers to have
replicated folders.
I can't think of a benefit you would obtain by applying load balancing to
replicated file and print servers. You could build the biggest servers
you can. You could cluster them. You could split the files over more than
one physical server using a single namespace. This last one sounds like
what you are thinking of,
Hope that helps,
Anthony
http://www.airdesk.co.uk
Post by Don
The DC's really aren't an issue, they already have two dc's several ts
servers and app servers. About two dozen windows boxes up and running,
I just need to move there file and print to windows boxes. I like the
concept of the independant name space. This is definately what I'm
looking for, but with dfs isn't there a replication latency. I may be
off base here, but I was thinking that this was used with one in the
datacenter and one at a remote site which acted as sort of a file
caching server. If both servers are in the same location, does it offer
any type of load balancing, or would it be an active/passive type
configuration?
I know I'm asking alot. I guess I'm looking for something to split up
the load without having to point different users to different servers.
Post by Anthony
Don,
1) I don't really know what the best practice could say. The simplest
setup is one DC, one file and print server, and a good backup. You
could have two DC's with file and print, but I personally don't like
that as it means that a file and print administrator also needs to be a
domain administrator. This may not matter to you, and two DC's gives
you more resilience. Two DC's plus two file and print is nice if you
can afford it, and if the resilience is very important.
2) DFS gives you a namespace that is server independent. This is a good
thing regardless of sites. It enables you to move data between servers
without making changes to clients or applications.
Hope that helps,
Anthony -
http://www.airdesk.co.uk
Post by Don
I have just been tasked with migrating a clinic which we support from
netware to windows. We currently have them setup for both edirectory
and AD with all of there file and print running on a single netware
server. They have about 500 client pc's and about half of those
utilize the file server for network storage.
1. Can someone point me to a document which gives best practices for
file server requirements in the above scenario. (one server, two,
etc...) I have read some of the technet stuff, but I spend more time
clicking around than actually getting an info.
2. I would like to move away from a server centric solution, it
appears that dfs is more for remote sites. Would it be applicable
with all servers located in the home datacenter?
Thanks in advance...
Don
2007-07-25 22:08:46 UTC
Permalink
The DC's really aren't an issue, they already have two dc's several ts
servers and app servers. About two dozen windows boxes up and running,
I just need to move there file and print to windows boxes. I like the
concept of the independant name space. This is definately what I'm
looking for, but with dfs isn't there a replication latency. I may be
off base here, but I was thinking that this was used with one in the
datacenter and one at a remote site which acted as sort of a file
caching server. If both servers are in the same location, does it offer
any type of load balancing, or would it be an active/passive type
configuration?

I know I'm asking alot. I guess I'm looking for something to split up
the load without having to point different users to different servers.
Post by Anthony
Don,
1) I don't really know what the best practice could say. The simplest setup
is one DC, one file and print server, and a good backup. You could have two
DC's with file and print, but I personally don't like that as it means that
a file and print administrator also needs to be a domain administrator. This
may not matter to you, and two DC's gives you more resilience. Two DC's plus
two file and print is nice if you can afford it, and if the resilience is
very important.
2) DFS gives you a namespace that is server independent. This is a good
thing regardless of sites. It enables you to move data between servers
without making changes to clients or applications.
Hope that helps,
Anthony -
http://www.airdesk.co.uk
Post by Don
I have just been tasked with migrating a clinic which we support from
netware to windows. We currently have them setup for both edirectory and
AD with all of there file and print running on a single netware server.
They have about 500 client pc's and about half of those utilize the file
server for network storage.
1. Can someone point me to a document which gives best practices for file
server requirements in the above scenario. (one server, two, etc...) I
have read some of the technet stuff, but I spend more time clicking around
than actually getting an info.
2. I would like to move away from a server centric solution, it appears
that dfs is more for remote sites. Would it be applicable with all
servers located in the home datacenter?
Thanks in advance...
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...