Kooler on DFS-R Issues
-
@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).
-
@KOOLER said in Kooler on DFS-R Issues:
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).
Yeah, this is the biggest thing I dislike about DFS-R. I get the logic behind why they did it that way... but there are much better ways to do it. There was then, and there is now.
-
@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.
-
Sourced page has a disclaimer right on top about people violating licensing agreement by just doing things AS IS.
-
You absolutely can do what article is suggesting as long as you buy CALs. This is a blessed and hugged way. By Microsoft.
-
-
@KOOLER said in Kooler on DFS-R Issues:
@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.
That's the point - you clearly have no idea what you're talking about
-
Sourced page has a disclaimer right on top about people violating licensing agreement by just doing things AS IS.
-
You absolutely can do what article is suggesting as long as you buy CALs. This is a blessed and hugged way. By Microsoft.
No, I am not clear. Is this on Hyper-V Server 20XX or on Server 20XX + Hyper-V. because the only thing I have saw named was Hyper-V. When I read that name, it strictly implies Hyper-V Server 20XX and not Server 20XX + Hyper-V
-
-
@KOOLER Alright, I read it all again, and I see it is on Hyper-V Server 2012 R2.
So what licensing would be involved. Server 2012 User CALS only?
That is cheap and simple. -
@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.
You absolutely can. You just have to license this usage in the proper way. Let's get to Hyper-V Server EULA here:
Running Instances of the Server Software. For each software license you assign, you may run one instance of the server software in the physical operating system environment on the licensed server. The instance of the server software running in the physical operating system environment may be used only to:· provide hardware virtualization services, and/or
· run software to manage and service operating system environments on the licensed server.
Key point here is - LICENSED server. Hyper-V Server isn't licensed, so you have to buy CAL for every single instance (physical or virtual) accessing it from "outside". That's it
-
@JaredBusch said in Kooler on DFS-R Issues:
@KOOLER Alright, I read it all again, and I see it is on Hyper-V Server 2012 R2.
So what licensing would be involved. Server 2012 User CALS only?
That is cheap and simple.Yes. Or 2016 for the same price.
P.S. I've changed wording for my post - too rude IMHO, you might want to edit your quoted one.
-
@KOOLER originally we were talking about Hyper-V free but @scottalanmiller indicated it requires a CAL for whatever that SAN product is
Which I guess runs on Windows server???
The linked article in OP says hyper-v free
-
@bigbear said in Kooler on DFS-R Issues:
@KOOLER originally we were talking about Hyper-V free but @scottalanmiller indicated it requires a CAL for whatever that SAN product is
Which I guess runs on Windows server???
The linked article in OP says hyper-v free
Hyperv is free, this doesn't mean that you may legally be required to user Microsoft Server to perform the job at hand.
-
All I want is a clarification on what licenses are supposedly required here.
That you can do something on a Microsoft OS (Hyper-V in this case) means nothing. Microsoft has never been about locked down compliance.
If it requires a Server 2012 R2 license and then CALS, it is simply Server 2012R2 + Hyper-V roles, even if you only installed Hyper-V Server 2012 R2.
If it somehow only requires user CALS, then great.
-
@bigbear said in Kooler on DFS-R Issues:
@KOOLER originally we were talking about Hyper-V free but @scottalanmiller indicated it requires a CAL for whatever that SAN product is
Which I guess runs on Windows server???
The linked article in OP says hyper-v free
I didn't mention CALs. Was someone else.
-
@JaredBusch said in Kooler on DFS-R Issues:
All I want is a clarification on what licenses are supposedly required here.
That you can do something on a Microsoft OS (Hyper-V in this case) means nothing. Microsoft has never been about locked down compliance.
If it requires a Server 2012 R2 license and then CALS, it is simply Server 2012R2 + Hyper-V roles, even if you only installed Hyper-V Server 2012 R2.
If it somehow only requires user CALS, then great.
Nah, you don't need anything except CALs.
-
@KOOLER said in Kooler on DFS-R Issues:
@JaredBusch said in Kooler on DFS-R Issues:
All I want is a clarification on what licenses are supposedly required here.
That you can do something on a Microsoft OS (Hyper-V in this case) means nothing. Microsoft has never been about locked down compliance.
If it requires a Server 2012 R2 license and then CALS, it is simply Server 2012R2 + Hyper-V roles, even if you only installed Hyper-V Server 2012 R2.
If it somehow only requires user CALS, then great.
Nah, you don't need anything except CALs.
That doesn't make sense to me... that you can clearly violate the license terms and the whole point of Hyper-V Server as long as you have CALs?
-
@Tim_G said in Kooler on DFS-R Issues:
@KOOLER said in Kooler on DFS-R Issues:
@JaredBusch said in Kooler on DFS-R Issues:
All I want is a clarification on what licenses are supposedly required here.
That you can do something on a Microsoft OS (Hyper-V in this case) means nothing. Microsoft has never been about locked down compliance.
If it requires a Server 2012 R2 license and then CALS, it is simply Server 2012R2 + Hyper-V roles, even if you only installed Hyper-V Server 2012 R2.
If it somehow only requires user CALS, then great.
Nah, you don't need anything except CALs.
That doesn't make sense to me... that you can clearly violate the license terms and the whole point of Hyper-V Server as long as you have CALs?
What licenses would you resolve it with?
-
@KOOLER said in Kooler on DFS-R Issues:
@JaredBusch said in Kooler on DFS-R Issues:
All I want is a clarification on what licenses are supposedly required here.
That you can do something on a Microsoft OS (Hyper-V in this case) means nothing. Microsoft has never been about locked down compliance.
If it requires a Server 2012 R2 license and then CALS, it is simply Server 2012R2 + Hyper-V roles, even if you only installed Hyper-V Server 2012 R2.
If it somehow only requires user CALS, then great.
Nah, you don't need anything except CALs.
I'm confused. As far as I know it @JaredBusch is correct.
-
@bigbear said in Kooler on DFS-R Issues:
@Tim_G said in Kooler on DFS-R Issues:
@KOOLER said in Kooler on DFS-R Issues:
@JaredBusch said in Kooler on DFS-R Issues:
All I want is a clarification on what licenses are supposedly required here.
That you can do something on a Microsoft OS (Hyper-V in this case) means nothing. Microsoft has never been about locked down compliance.
If it requires a Server 2012 R2 license and then CALS, it is simply Server 2012R2 + Hyper-V roles, even if you only installed Hyper-V Server 2012 R2.
If it somehow only requires user CALS, then great.
Nah, you don't need anything except CALs.
That doesn't make sense to me... that you can clearly violate the license terms and the whole point of Hyper-V Server as long as you have CALs?
What licenses would you resolve it with?
Windows Server Standard or Datacenter. To use "Windows features" of Hyper-V in a non-Hyper-V support role requires normal Windows licensing. It's a Windows VM that you are using. The exemption from licensing is only for very specific Hyper-V management functions. Otherwise you must license as normal.
You'd still need CALs too of course. But additionally. Not instead of a server license.
-
With Starwind's coming Linux release (or has it already been released?)... Would this not be done in a Linux VM? That would eliminate concerns about licensing and such.
-
@dafyre said in Kooler on DFS-R Issues:
With Starwind's coming Linux release (or has it already been released?)... Would this not be done in a Linux VM? That would eliminate concerns about licensing and such.
The KVM release should fix this, yes.
