We help IT Professionals succeed at work.

2008 R2 DFS

WNottsC asked
Medium Priority
Last Modified: 2012-05-11
I am just trying to get my head arround DFS

we have just moved our Domain to 2008 R2.  What I have read about DFS is very promising but wanted to clarify something.  Currently we have file servers at a number of sites and also the central campus.  We have moved all the team drives from these sites to the central campus.

We hoped the bandwidth would be sufficent but we have had complaints of slow access and timeouts even though I can not replicate this.

I hope DFS can help with this.   What we would like to do is have a share (1TB in size) on each of the sites and a central share on the campus (10TB most users are on this site).  From what I understand through DFS namespaces we could then have a that would look at all of these  as a single share but through enumeration people would on see what they had rights to see.

THis sounds great but would this need DFS replication as well.  Obviously we do not have 10TB of  space at the external sites.

I hope this all made sense
Watch Question

Top Expert 2011

Replication is not needed unless you want it fault tolerant.  You would create one name space, in which all the students would acccess, then create your links under your name space.  The links would be short cuts to the data where it is housed.  To the students it would be as if it was in the same location..  DFS can do this.  Take a look at the doc:

I hope this helps
kevinhsiehNetwork Engineer

I recommend also using DFS replication so you have a copy of all files in a central location. It makes backups a lot easier. It also provides for redundancy in case a server should go down. DFS doesn't handle multiple edits to different copies of the same document very well, sp you have to make sure that it doesn't happen. The normal way to do that is to have only one copy available at a time.


The idea for this was really that we may have a central site where 90% of people are.  Site A would have 5% of staff and Site B 5% Staff.  All staff files were moved centrally so the backups were quicker and would be easier to manage.

However the 5% of people are talking about access problems at Site A which has a slow link.

Staff at Site A would spend 99.9999% of there time at Site A, so it would make sense to keep them there and only these staff would need to access the files at Site A.  However I would like to present a single share to all staff.

That is why I was thinking that DFS namespace would be suitable and would mean staff at Site A would not get any issues with time outs and slow access dues to the slow links.

THe reason I would not put DFS Replication on would be that the main site would be replicating 10 TB of data around the other sites that would never be touched at those sites and I would not have the storage capacity at Site A or B for this amount of Data
Top Expert 2011
Unlock this solution and get a sample of our free trial.
(No credit card required)
Unlock the solution to this question.
Thanks for using Experts Exchange.

Please provide your email to receive a sample view!

*This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.


Please enter a first name

Please enter a last name

8+ characters (letters, numbers, and a symbol)

By clicking, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.