Kooler on DFS-R Issues
-
@Tim_G that is interesting to know, will do some reading up.
I nearly deployed a branch cache environment circa 2009 or 2010 but just didnt have the desire to go through trial and error. Have you had any experience with that?
-
@bigbear said in Kooler on DFS-R Issues:
@Tim_G that is interesting to know, will do some reading up.
I nearly deployed a branch cache environment circa 2009 or 2010 but just didnt have the desire to go through trial and error. Have you had any experience with that?
I wouldn't use it pre-2012 R2. But as far as implementing it, what's the occasion and requirement?
-
Few TB of live data being accessed between two sites WAS the scenario. The company has reorganized and split in to two new companies at this point. Now I am just curious as I have been in Microsoft mode all weekend.
Before it was a lot of CAD drawings access remotely, edited and collaborated on between offices.
-
@Tim_G said in Kooler on DFS-R Issues:
So... Keeping in mind you can use free Hyper-V server and free StarWind virtual SAN to build a two-node shared nothing SMB3 clustered file server free of charge... I think it's time to retire DFS-R See Step-by-Step guide:
Hyper-V: Free “Shared Nothing” SMB3 Failover File Server
https://www.starwindsoftware.com/blog/part-2-smb-3-0-file-server-on-free-microsoft-hyper-v-server-20...
Except this violates the Hyper-V Server 20xx license and is illegal. Do it on Windows Server and all is well. You'll need two Windows Server licenses, but StarWind vSAN is free. Or use Linux with StarWind vSAN.
I'm not too sure about SMB 3.x on Linux, but there may be ways.
I only skimmed things, was this enabling a role on the hyper-v server itself? If so, this is completely against the license agreement and not something anyone related to this forum should be supporting or posting.
-
@JaredBusch I actually couldn't figure out why the OP violated the licensing agreement. Its running a 3rd party image on the free version of Hyper-V
-
@JaredBusch said in Kooler on DFS-R Issues:
@Tim_G said in Kooler on DFS-R Issues:
So... Keeping in mind you can use free Hyper-V server and free StarWind virtual SAN to build a two-node shared nothing SMB3 clustered file server free of charge... I think it's time to retire DFS-R See Step-by-Step guide:
Hyper-V: Free “Shared Nothing” SMB3 Failover File Server
https://www.starwindsoftware.com/blog/part-2-smb-3-0-file-server-on-free-microsoft-hyper-v-server-20...
Except this violates the Hyper-V Server 20xx license and is illegal. Do it on Windows Server and all is well. You'll need two Windows Server licenses, but StarWind vSAN is free. Or use Linux with StarWind vSAN.
I'm not too sure about SMB 3.x on Linux, but there may be ways.
I only skimmed things, was this enabling a role on the hyper-v server itself? If so, this is completely against the license agreement and not something anyone related to this forum should be supporting or posting.
Not against the license, but not free. Requires consuming one of your two VM licenses to do it if it is the only workload.
-
@bigbear said in Kooler on DFS-R Issues:
@JaredBusch I actually couldn't figure out why the OP violated the licensing agreement. Its running a 3rd party image on the free version of Hyper-V
I spoke to them about this and apparently even MS has some uncertainty as to their license here and they've been trying to work it out. Some people at MS have told them that if they is used purely in the support of Hyper-V (including other Hyper-V) that it qualifies the same as a backup agent under the free use. but if you use it as a general SAN, of course it does not apply, like connecting it to ESXi. But because you are able to run pieces like this in a hyperconverged mode under the free license, it makes sense that you can in a non-hyperconverged mode as well.
-
But of course, if you are doing this to make an SMB server to serve files directly to end users, doesn't work without consuming a license.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Kooler on DFS-R Issues:
@bigbear said in Kooler on DFS-R Issues:
@JaredBusch I actually couldn't figure out why the OP violated the licensing agreement. Its running a 3rd party image on the free version of Hyper-V
I spoke to them about this and apparently even MS has some uncertainty as to their license here and they've been trying to work it out. Some people at MS have told them that if they is used purely in the support of Hyper-V (including other Hyper-V) that it qualifies the same as a backup agent under the free use. but if you use it as a general SAN, of course it does not apply, like connecting it to ESXi. But because you are able to run pieces like this in a hyperconverged mode under the free license, it makes sense that you can in a non-hyperconverged mode as well.
The physical server running Hyper-V Server (the hypervisor) cannot act as a file server, serving files to users or clients. It can only be used for supporting Hyper-V... including clustering, monitoring, etc.
I think I linked licensing information specific to this either here or on SW. I don't feel like digging it up atm, but will later if I need to.
-
@Tim_G said in Kooler on DFS-R Issues:
The physical server running Hyper-V Server (the hypervisor) cannot act as a file server, serving files to users or clients. It can only be used for supporting Hyper-V... including clustering, monitoring, etc.
The problem is, those are conflicting statements. Supporting Hyper-V Clustering is specifically what it is used for. Otherwise, you consume a license using Starwind always or even not using Starwind, just using local disks. But we know that local disks are okay. So using Starwind for Hyper-V clustering is logically okay as well. It just makes sense. It follows by the wording and the intent of the license.
Now maybe there is an argument that Hyper-V cannot provide its own storage via SMB3 and only iSCSI, in which case, I could see that being convoluted and weird, but could make sense.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Kooler on DFS-R Issues:
@Tim_G said in Kooler on DFS-R Issues:
The physical server running Hyper-V Server (the hypervisor) cannot act as a file server, serving files to users or clients. It can only be used for supporting Hyper-V... including clustering, monitoring, etc.
The problem is, those are conflicting statements. Supporting Hyper-V Clustering is specifically what it is used for. Otherwise, you consume a license using Starwind always or even not using Starwind, just using local disks. But we know that local disks are okay. So using Starwind for Hyper-V clustering is logically okay as well. It just makes sense. It follows by the wording and the intent of the license.
Now maybe there is an argument that Hyper-V cannot provide its own storage via SMB3 and only iSCSI, in which case, I could see that being convoluted and weird, but could make sense.
I meant clustering as in you can add your Hyper-V Server hypervisor to a hyper-v cluster. Then sure you can have a licensed windows VM running on that cluster that is doing the storage services and file serving... but not at the host level for the file services roles and features.
-
You can't install a 3rd party software to do storage or file server roles in place of the built in, thinking that is a way around it. It's not.
-
@Tim_G said in Kooler on DFS-R Issues:
... but not at the host level for the file services roles and features.
Right, not for FS role.
-
@Tim_G said in Kooler on DFS-R Issues:
You can't install a 3rd party software to do storage or file server roles in place of the built in, thinking that is a way around it. It's not.
Correct, I agree. In the clustering scenario, Hyper-V can do it with or without SW.
-
Does this solution not work on any other hypervisors?
-
@bigbear said in Kooler on DFS-R Issues:
Does this solution not work on any other hypervisors?
It does, but requires a Windows VM.
-
@Tim_G said in Kooler on DFS-R Issues:
So... Keeping in mind you can use free Hyper-V server and free StarWind virtual SAN to build a two-node shared nothing SMB3 clustered file server free of charge... I think it's time to retire DFS-R See Step-by-Step guide:
Hyper-V: Free “Shared Nothing” SMB3 Failover File Server
https://www.starwindsoftware.com/blog/part-2-smb-3-0-file-server-on-free-microsoft-hyper-v-server-20...
Except this violates the Hyper-V Server 20xx license and is illegal. Do it on Windows Server and all is well. You'll need two Windows Server licenses, but StarWind vSAN is free. Or use Linux with StarWind vSAN.
I'm not too sure about SMB 3.x on Linux, but there may be ways.
- Yup. That's why there's a disclaimer on the page I reference
Disclaimer: Please, do not violate license agreements for financial benefit. If you can do something, it doesn’t mean you should. This post is dedicated for one-time sole use of the mentioned setup – non-commercial, home lab or experiment. If you plan to earn money, please refrain from proceeding repeating the test described in this post.
- There are third-party stacks like Visuality Systems NQ or MoSMB. I don't think Samba is going anywhere
- Yup. That's why there's a disclaimer on the page I reference
-
@scottalanmiller Ahh
-
@scottalanmiller said in Kooler on DFS-R Issues:
@Tim_G said in Kooler on DFS-R Issues:
The physical server running Hyper-V Server (the hypervisor) cannot act as a file server, serving files to users or clients. It can only be used for supporting Hyper-V... including clustering, monitoring, etc.
The problem is, those are conflicting statements. Supporting Hyper-V Clustering is specifically what it is used for. Otherwise, you consume a license using Starwind always or even not using Starwind, just using local disks. But we know that local disks are okay. So using Starwind for Hyper-V clustering is logically okay as well. It just makes sense. It follows by the wording and the intent of the license.
Now maybe there is an argument that Hyper-V cannot provide its own storage via SMB3 and only iSCSI, in which case, I could see that being convoluted and weird, but could make sense.
You can do that but you need to buy CALs for that purpose.
-
Scott, thank you for bring in this thread! I've actually forgot about performance. Both source and destination updated
- Performance issues
DFS isn't in-line, it writes file first to read it and replicate later. This means there's 100% IOPS (read) overhead on everything you write to DFS-R enabled share.
DFS-R is reading from one replica always so there's no performance "boost" on reading data from the second copy as well (this is something what active-active clustered guys will do).
