Please help

Hi NG,

I have Server1 as a file server and would like to have Server2 as a standby
server in case Server1 encounter a problem.

Both servers are separate no shared hard drive. Each have it's own hard
disk.

What is the best setup?

Is clustering an overkill for this kind of setup?

What about DFS is it possible?

Thank you in advance.





Praetorian Guard

Clustering is definitely overkill.

DFS should handle this, but there is still a lot of 2-way replication going
on under the hood that you might not understand or control properly - I came
unstuck.

I use robocopy from a batch file to force one-way replication. This runs
several times a day. If main file-server crashes we could lose two hours of
transactions, but the copies are date/time-stamped, and I and my boss
understand how they were made.
--
Newell White


"Praetorian Guard" wrote:

> Hi NG,
>
> I have Server1 as a file server and would like to have Server2 as a standby
> server in case Server1 encounter a problem.
>
> Both servers are separate no shared hard drive. Each have it's own hard
> disk.
>
> What is the best setup?
>
> Is clustering an overkill for this kind of setup?
>
> What about DFS is it possible?
>
> Thank you in advance.
>
>
>
>

Greetings,

Greetings,

I recommend DFS as well. Clustering is not needed in your situation.

Hope this helps,
--
Louis Vitiello Jr.
MCSE +S, MCSA, MCP, A+/N+
ERCP XP Pro / Net Concepts

"Newell White" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:9B0111A8-7B33-4BE8-ADAB-(E-Mail Removed)...
> Clustering is definitely overkill.
>
> DFS should handle this, but there is still a lot of 2-way replication
> going
> on under the hood that you might not understand or control properly - I
> came
> unstuck.
>
> I use robocopy from a batch file to force one-way replication. This runs
> several times a day. If main file-server crashes we could lose two hours
> of
> transactions, but the copies are date/time-stamped, and I and my boss
> understand how they were made.
> --
> Newell White
>
>
> "Praetorian Guard" wrote:
>
>> Hi NG,
>>
>> I have Server1 as a file server and would like to have Server2 as a
>> standby
>> server in case Server1 encounter a problem.
>>
>> Both servers are separate no shared hard drive. Each have it's own hard
>> disk.
>>
>> What is the best setup?
>>
>> Is clustering an overkill for this kind of setup?
>>
>> What about DFS is it possible?
>>
>> Thank you in advance.
>>
>>
>>
>>

Thank you! I will take a look on how to setup DFS.

"Louis Vitiello Jr." <louv-(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Greetings,
>
> Greetings,
>
> I recommend DFS as well. Clustering is not needed in your situation.
>
> Hope this helps,
> --
> Louis Vitiello Jr.
> MCSE +S, MCSA, MCP, A+/N+
> ERCP XP Pro / Net Concepts
>
> "Newell White" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:9B0111A8-7B33-4BE8-ADAB-(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Clustering is definitely overkill.
>>
>> DFS should handle this, but there is still a lot of 2-way replication
>> going
>> on under the hood that you might not understand or control properly - I
>> came
>> unstuck.
>>
>> I use robocopy from a batch file to force one-way replication. This runs
>> several times a day. If main file-server crashes we could lose two hours
>> of
>> transactions, but the copies are date/time-stamped, and I and my boss
>> understand how they were made.
>> --
>> Newell White
>>
>>
>> "Praetorian Guard" wrote:
>>
>>> Hi NG,
>>>
>>> I have Server1 as a file server and would like to have Server2 as a
>>> standby
>>> server in case Server1 encounter a problem.
>>>
>>> Both servers are separate no shared hard drive. Each have it's own hard
>>> disk.
>>>
>>> What is the best setup?
>>>
>>> Is clustering an overkill for this kind of setup?
>>>
>>> What about DFS is it possible?
>>>
>>> Thank you in advance.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>

Thank you! I already have a license for xxcopy maybe that is good enough.


"Newell White" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:9B0111A8-7B33-4BE8-ADAB-(E-Mail Removed)...
> Clustering is definitely overkill.
>
> DFS should handle this, but there is still a lot of 2-way replication
> going
> on under the hood that you might not understand or control properly - I
> came
> unstuck.
>
> I use robocopy from a batch file to force one-way replication. This runs
> several times a day. If main file-server crashes we could lose two hours
> of
> transactions, but the copies are date/time-stamped, and I and my boss
> understand how they were made.
> --
> Newell White
>
>
> "Praetorian Guard" wrote:
>
>> Hi NG,
>>
>> I have Server1 as a file server and would like to have Server2 as a
>> standby
>> server in case Server1 encounter a problem.
>>
>> Both servers are separate no shared hard drive. Each have it's own hard
>> disk.
>>
>> What is the best setup?
>>
>> Is clustering an overkill for this kind of setup?
>>
>> What about DFS is it possible?
>>
>> Thank you in advance.
>>
>>
>>
>>

Robocopy is free - part of the W2k3 resource kit.
Check http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/
--
Newell White


"Praetorian Guard" wrote:

> Thank you! I already have a license for xxcopy maybe that is good enough.
>
>
> "Newell White" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:9B0111A8-7B33-4BE8-ADAB-(E-Mail Removed)...
> > Clustering is definitely overkill.
> >
> > DFS should handle this, but there is still a lot of 2-way replication
> > going
> > on under the hood that you might not understand or control properly - I
> > came
> > unstuck.
> >
> > I use robocopy from a batch file to force one-way replication. This runs
> > several times a day. If main file-server crashes we could lose two hours
> > of
> > transactions, but the copies are date/time-stamped, and I and my boss
> > understand how they were made.
> > --
> > Newell White
> >
> >
> > "Praetorian Guard" wrote:
> >
> >> Hi NG,
> >>
> >> I have Server1 as a file server and would like to have Server2 as a
> >> standby
> >> server in case Server1 encounter a problem.
> >>
> >> Both servers are separate no shared hard drive. Each have it's own hard
> >> disk.
> >>
> >> What is the best setup?
> >>
> >> Is clustering an overkill for this kind of setup?
> >>
> >> What about DFS is it possible?
> >>
> >> Thank you in advance.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>
>

Robocopy is free - part of w2k3 resource kit from
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/
--
Newell White


"Praetorian Guard" wrote:

> Thank you! I already have a license for xxcopy maybe that is good enough.
>
>
> "Newell White" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:9B0111A8-7B33-4BE8-ADAB-(E-Mail Removed)...
> > Clustering is definitely overkill.
> >
> > DFS should handle this, but there is still a lot of 2-way replication
> > going
> > on under the hood that you might not understand or control properly - I
> > came
> > unstuck.
> >
> > I use robocopy from a batch file to force one-way replication. This runs
> > several times a day. If main file-server crashes we could lose two hours
> > of
> > transactions, but the copies are date/time-stamped, and I and my boss
> > understand how they were made.
> > --
> > Newell White
> >
> >
> > "Praetorian Guard" wrote:
> >
> >> Hi NG,
> >>
> >> I have Server1 as a file server and would like to have Server2 as a
> >> standby
> >> server in case Server1 encounter a problem.
> >>
> >> Both servers are separate no shared hard drive. Each have it's own hard
> >> disk.
> >>
> >> What is the best setup?
> >>
> >> Is clustering an overkill for this kind of setup?
> >>
> >> What about DFS is it possible?
> >>
> >> Thank you in advance.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>
>