Note
Access to this page requires authorization. You can try signing in or changing directories.
Access to this page requires authorization. You can try changing directories.
Question
Saturday, September 28, 2013 10:21 AM
Hi,
In what kind of scenario's does DFS Replication takes preferrence over Failover Cluster and visa versa ?
(Windows Server 2012)
All replies (1)
Saturday, September 28, 2013 2:38 PM âś…Answered
Hi,
In what kind of scenario's does DFS Replication takes preferrence over Failover Cluster and visa versa ?
(Windows Server 2012)
Failover cluster assumes you have a shared storage (FC, iSCSI or SAS) to host your file content (guess you're talking file servers as you compare vs. DFS) while DFS can perfectly live w/o it. Also failover cluster assumes you have a pretty fat pipe between nodes and DFS if configured in a one-way direction can live with something more WAN-ish then LAN-ish. These are two very questionable benefits of a DFS. Everything else (sluggish performance, flaky failover and complicated management, resolving conflicts with files went out of sync on the both nodes, inability to host VMs etc) is making DFS pain to use. Good news: you can deploy virtual SAN software basically mirroring LUNs (even SATA) between hosts and have storage hardware-less cluster. With this config (and still a decent connection between your cluster nodes) you can perfectly spawn a failover SMB share instead of a DFS.