We are looking to deploy the work folders to a pilot group of users. As part of this, we are wondering is there a way to have it set so the my documents/favorites and desktop folders can show up in the working folder. If a user days or deletes a file on the desktop it automatically deletes it from the work folder?
We are looking to potentially use this as a backup solution for them to use and automatically backup to the server instead of having to use a third party program.
Hi,
I'm being told to post here. Below is the link to the thread i posted:
I am in the midst of migrating all workstation to Windows 10 Pro from Windows 7 Pro. Our Domain Controller is also a File Server running on Windows 2012 R2. All staff's Desktop and My Documents are redirected to the file server \\servername\home$\%username%. Roaming profiles and offline files are enabled on all users. So far we have no issues with this setup for windows 7 users. However when tested on Windows 10 Pro machine, a weird behavior occurs.
Whenever a user edit and save an office file offline (at home), and connect back to the network (the following day), they will always get file sync conflict and .tmp file is created in that folder. See picture below.
When i check in the file server, the original file has been renamed to ~RFxxxxxxx.TMP suffix (or maybe the original file was deleted and then the .tmp file was created).
Because of this behavior, i am given 2 option to resolve this conflict. 1) Keep this version and copy it to the other location 2)Delete the version in both location. See below:
Of course i will choose option 1 which is to keep this version and copy it to the other location. Doing so, the latest copy of the file will be copied to the file server BUT the .tmp is still there. As such i have to manually delete the .tmp file.
Imagine doing this everyday for notebook users. It is quite annoying.
Any help will be appreciated.
Hi there!
I'm trying to use storage spaces, partly to learn about how that works, partly for actual use. But I ran into some problems, maybe it's my missing understanding of it.
So I have seven 2TB drives in a pool. Now I created a virtual disk with "simple" and "thin". It took some time to understand that even "simple" ALWAYS means striping (or is there a way around this? Setting columns to 1 perhaps?), which is no good, because ONE drive failure means all data is gone. The data I'm planing on storing there isn't that important, but losing all of it because of one drive when I don't even need "striped" performance? Nope.
So I tried to setup a "parity" disk with the GUI in the server manager, again with all seven physical disks. But the GUI only allows me to select "auto" or "3" for columns (where "auto" will set it to 3 anyway), which means a lot of wasted space as I found out. Why is that? Why can't I select 7?
Also I tried to setup a "parity" disk with dual redundancy in the GUI for my most important data. It's said I need seven physical disks. I have seven physical disks. What I don't have is that double redundancy disk, as I always get an error the likes of "not enough resources for this". Why? Seven disks are present ans selected for that.
Alright, trying to get the single parity disk to work with Powershell. Powershell doesn't even let me create a parity disk with three colums, while at the same time this is working via GUI. I don't get it. This is the line I'm using:
> New-VirtualDisk -StoragePoolFriendlyName Pool1 -FriendlyName Data1Red -ProvisioningType Thin -NumberOfColumns 7 -ResiliencySettingName Parity -Size 5TB -PhysicalDiskRedundancy 1
and this is the response I get
> New-VirtualDisk : Not Supported
>
> Extended information:
> The storage pool does not have sufficient eligible resources for the creation of the specified virtual disk.
>
> Recommended Actions:
> - Choose a combination of FaultDomainAwareness and NumberOfDataCopies (or PhysicalDiskRedundancy) supported by the > storage pool.
> - Choose a value for NumberOfColumns that is less than or equal to the number of physical disks in the storage fault domain > selected for the virtual disk.
>
> Activity ID: {566fc3b1-d19c-4b15-8bda-2a7621192f52}
> In Zeile:1 Zeichen:1
> + New-VirtualDisk -StoragePoolFriendlyName Pool1 -FriendlyName Daten1Re ...
> + ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> + CategoryInfo : InvalidOperation: (StorageWMI:ROOT/Microsoft/...SFT_StoragePool) [New-VirtualDisk], CimException
> + FullyQualifiedErrorId : StorageWMI 1,New-VirtualDisk
I tried all options for FaultDomainAwareness as suggested by the displayed error, but none is working. Am I supposed to tell New-VirtualDisk what physical drives from the pool it has to use with PhysicalDisksToUse? If so, how do I do that? I found nothing about what name I have to type for the physical drives.
I spent hours and hours to get this to work, please help.
Also, I think I discovered a bug. If I leave open the property window of a virtual drive with all three options (from the left part of the window) on display, the physical drives in the list start to multiply. Instead of 7 disks, I see 14, the same 7 below the first. After another while 21 and so on.
Good day Technet Team,
I am currently setting up DFS with replication on Windows 2012 R2, the share was established between two file servers however when specifying the namespace server an error is prompting the following error "Cannot connect to the lab.*****.com domain". The two file servers are existing on the same domain and the DFS feature was installed on both application servers. Can anyone assist?
I am migrating DFS shares on old file servers to server 2016. I can add the members based on existing memberships using powershell but when I try to set the membership to read only using powershell I get the following error:
Set-DfsrMembership : The read only property is not supported. The read only property is not supported.As a work around I have been manually setting them to read only using the DFS Management pane. Can anyone explain why I would be getting this error and how to work around it? I have tried setting it to read only when I set the other DFS properties and I've also tried setting it independently in a separate command. I am using the same variables to set the other DFS properties without issue.
Hello,
I'm trying to configure Multi-Resilient Volume (Mirror-Accelerated Parity) using "regular" Clustered Storage Spaces (not S2D) on Windows Server 2019. It is worth noting that I've tried the same scenario on Windows Server 2016 and got the same outcome. Also, it doesn't matter whether I use clustered or standalone Storage Spaces, the outcome is still the same.
My problem is that I'm unable to achieve storage efficiency higher than 50% for Multi-Resilient Volume, no matter what disk proportion I use in Performance and Capacity tiers.
Lab configuration:
2x Hyper-V VMs (OS: Windows Server 2019 DC)
10x VHD Sets (ex- Shared VHDx) placed on Cluster Shared Volume and attached to both VMs
I wanted to create a two-way mirror (2 disks) + single parity MRV (8 disks). Each disk is ~ 430GB.
Configuration steps:
#Creating new Pool Get-PhysicalDisk -CanPool $true New-StoragePool –FriendlyName MainPool –StorageSubsystemFriendlyName "Clustered Windows Storage*" –PhysicalDisks (Get-PhysicalDisk -CanPool $True) #Setting up media types for tiering Get-StoragePool -IsPrimordial $true | Get-PhysicalDisk -CanPool $true |Set-PhysicalDisk -MediaType HDD Get-StoragePool -IsPrimordial $true | Get-PhysicalDisk -CanPool $true | select -skip 8 |Set-PhysicalDisk -MediaType SSD #Configuring Capacity tier New-StorageTier -MediaType HDD -StoragePoolFriendlyName MainPool -FriendlyName CapacityTier -ResiliencySettingName Parity -FaultDomainAwareness PhysicalDisk -PhysicalDiskRedundancy 1 -NumberOfColumns 8 -Interleave 65536 $CapacityTier = Get-StorageTier -FriendlyName CapacityTier #Configuring Perfromance tier New-StorageTier -MediaType SSD -StoragePoolFriendlyName MainPool -FriendlyName PerfromanceTier -ResiliencySettingName Mirror -FaultDomainAwareness PhysicalDisk -PhysicalDiskRedundancy 1 -NumberOfDataCopies 2 -NumberOfColumns 1 -Interleave 65536 $PerfromanceTier = Get-StorageTier -FriendlyName PerfromanceTier #Creating Multi-Resilient Volume New-Volume -StoragePoolFriendlyName MainPool -FriendlyName MRVolume -FileSystem ReFS -AccessPath "X:" -ProvisioningType Fixed -AllocationUnitSize 4KB -StorageTierFriendlyName PerfromanceTier, CapacityTier -StorageTierSizes 400GB, 600GB
Result:
Get-StorageTier reports that both Performance and Capacity tiers have their resiliency type configured as "Mirror", and both have 50% storage efficiency.I obviously expect Capacity (Parity) tier to have more than 50% efficiency.
It would be great to hear the official response regarding this matter.
Is MRV in non-S2D configuration allowed for production?
Why the capacity tier with resiliency type = "parity" reports itself as "mirror"?
Is there a "proper" way to create the mirror+parity MRV with the efficiency of more than 50%?
I'm having a failover cluster with 2 servers. Both servers have 2 disks; 1 800GB for data and 1 20GB for logs. Of course these are GPT disks and I'm able to build a cluster and create a file server role.
I've used Storage Replica to replicate the 800GB disks. This works and I can host the file server role on both nodes in the cluster. I've created a share on the fileserver role and added some data to this share. No problems so far.
Now I want to copy more data to the fileserver role, but when doing to the replication will fail after having copied some GBs of data.
The event log of the cluster gives the following error:
Cluster resource '29382f4b-948c-4768-acc6-10fea296553a' of type 'Storage Replica' in clustered role 'SR Group 1' failed.
Based on the failure policies for the resource and role, the cluster service may try to bring the resource online on this node or move the group to another node of the cluster and then restart it. Check the resource and group state using Failover Cluster
Manager or the Get-ClusterResource Windows PowerShell cmdlet.
I can bring the disks online again and start the Storage Replica role, but I don't want it to fail.
In case someone wonders; I did run the "Validate Cluster..." wizard and I passed it.
Hi all, ive been reading the following article: - https://support.microsoft.com/en-gb/help/2533009/information-about-microsoft-support-policy-for-a-dfs-r-and-dfs-n-deplo . And this outlines a scenario in which MS doesn't support the use of DFS-R and DFS-N for roaming profiles.
Firstly, is this still valid for Server 2016, as it is a five year old article now? If it is still valid then I need to investigate other options for the scenario of:-
1) VDI users in two active site locations.
2) All VDI users have Roaming Profiles and also use Document Redirection.
3) Users profiles are as small as possible, due to policies in place to restrict their ability to do pretty much anything.
4) The Profiles share is separate to the Documents share, and this would be the same for Namespaces (i.e. there will be two separate shares/namespaces).
There will be around 200 users active in one site, and 100 active in the other. The WAN link between sites is 1Gbps, with latency around 1ms. We would like to be able to publish the Roaming Profile Namespace and also the Document Namespace, and use these in the updated GPO's for all users.
We need to provide Active/Active site resilience to allow either 'set' of users to fail-over to the other site in a DR situation, and for their Desktops/settings/documents to be fully available. The VDI environment is using VMWare.
Thanks for any help.
Phil
Hi,
I am just wondering what the codes/numbers mean on the 'lock' column when using 'managing open files' on Windows Server. When someone has a files open it can have 0,1,2 or 3 and I have looked else where and cant seem to find an answer.
Hi everyone,
Well, I want to know if enabling VSS snapshot on the Disks drives can handle ransomware attack, I mean if I have multiple Healthy VSS snapshots and my data is infected by ransomware, could I recover from one of healthy snapshots ?
Thank you.
Planning to setup new servers and using Storage Replica for DR.
Servers are Hyper-V VMs so I can size my data disks as needed.
I have 120TB of data.
Q1. I've read on unofficial sites that data disks should be no larger than 10TB for SR - is this correct?
Q2. I can scale out the VMs and have multiple servers each with multiple volumes if required. I'm trying to gauge the recommended approach - do I have 1 server with 12 x 10TB volumes, or 2 servers with 6 x 10TB volumes, or 1 server with 2 x 60TB volumes etc. i.e. is there a hard limit imposed by SR?
Hi,
I don't remember the feature in Windows Server that locks down the use of files, created in a AD Domain, outside the domain.
Example:
A file is created (.docx, .xlsx etc.) in a AD enviroment and it cannot be opened by computers outside the domain.
Any info is appreciated
Regards
If using Windows Server 2019 File Server Namespace is there a limitation to number of DFS namespace folders?
Is it typical to have a top-level shared folder on the File Server e.g. Users. as the folder target. A single DFS namespace link points to the single folder target. All users will be able to see all sub-folders in the share e.g. UserA, User B etc. but use NTFS permissions to restrict access.
Or can I hide the other users folders?
Or does it make sense to have thousands of shares (one per user), thousands of folder targets, thousands of namespace links?
Hi
Recently we migrated our file server from Win 2008 R2 to Win 2012 R2. We have few users using Windows 7 machines.
Of this in few Win 7 machines users are not able to connect to their shares . The same user can access the folder on a different Win 7 machine. Need some inputs on this
When I search from the server (SBS2011) inside a particular folder, the search results show the folder paths for the results as being located in a Temporary Burn Folder on the same drive instead of the actual folder path.
Example:
I search for a folder called "TEST" in D:\Data\Docs\IT Docs\Temp
The result shows the TEST folder as being located in D:\Data\Temporary Burn Folder\IT Docs\Temp
Hi all, has anyone come across a method for re-establishing a new storage replica server-server partnership following the loss of the primary / source computer? I can failover to the secondary successfully but face an error when 'failing back' to a new primary.
Is it possible to start a new replication partnership with a disk that has previously been used for replication?
Here is the situation I'm considering:
New-SRPartnership : Unable to create replication group RG03, detailed reason: Failed to provision
partition 5e862dd9-ecb1-49a3-b086-29857cfcf215. This is an error relating to COMPUTER2
I'm having hard time figuring this out.
I deployed a DFS Replication environment. Also I want to deploy folder redirection using gpo.
I want user's Desktop, Documents and Downloads redirected to the DFS
My configuration:
1. I created a security group named sgUserProfile. Then added users to the group
2. Under the shared folder ( target folder of DFS ) I created folder named User Profile. In that folder's security I added sgUserProfile with:
(Folder Structure is : Network_Share > User Profile)
3. I created a gpo for folder redirection.
When I login to the client pc. The user's username is created in the User Profile folder but the Desktop, Download and Documents where not redirected.
In which part of the configuration I made mistakes?
Thanks in Advance.