Hyper V replica VS DFS



  • Hi all

    Wonder if anyone can shed some light on what solution is 'better ' or 'preferred' between Hyper V replica and DFS replication.

    We have a server running hyper v and a couple of VMs (one DC and one Application and file server).

    We were initally thinking of using DFS replication for the data (to a secondary offsite server). However I wasn't sure if I should just do a hyper v replication as this as far as I know would replicate the entire server (apps and data) to our secondary site.
    Note the secondary site is AWS.

    What's your thoughts on the Hyper V replica VS DFS replication?

    Thanks



  • Hyper-V Replica is for replicating Virtual Machines.

    DFS-R is for replicating files that are NOT virtual machines or databases.

    Never replicate Virtual Machine disks (.vhd,.vhdx, etc) or databases via DFS-R.


  • Service Provider

    @tim_g said in Hyper V replica VS DFS:

    DFS-R is for replicating files that are NOT virtual machines or databases.

    Because those are specific cases of file types that are left "open" all the time, is why.



  • Okay so am I right in saying its best to use DFS to replicate/sync file shares across multiple servers? And hyper-v replica to replicate the entire VM's to another server?

    If we utilize Hype-V replica, will that also replicate the contents within the VM (ie. AD, file shares, permisisons etc) so it'll be like for like at the additional site?



  • @joel said in Hyper V replica VS DFS:

    Okay so am I right in saying its best to use DFS to replicate/sync file shares across multiple servers? And hyper-v replica to replicate the entire VM's to another server?

    Yes



  • @joel said in Hyper V replica VS DFS:

    If we utilize Hype-V replica, will that also replicate the contents within the VM (ie. AD, file shares, permisisons etc) so it'll be like for like at the additional site?

    Hyper-V replica replicates the entire VM, that means everything inside the VM. i.e. you could turn off the main VM, then start up the replica and it will just keep working (assuming networking is setup) as if a reboot had happened (OK Not really, DCs didn't like to be rolled back, which is what booting from a replica would essentially be doing - but starting with Server 2012 or 2012R2, they became a bit smarter about this).



  • What is your goal, then we can help offer suggestions to get there.


  • Service Provider

    @joel said in Hyper V replica VS DFS:

    If we utilize Hype-V replica, will that also replicate the contents within the VM (ie. AD, file shares, permisisons etc) so it'll be like for like at the additional site?

    If it didn't replicate the contents, what would it be replicating? The VM is a file, the file is copied. It doesn't look through and arbitrarily destroy data inside the file.



  • @scottalanmiller said in Hyper V replica VS DFS:

    @joel said in Hyper V replica VS DFS:

    If we utilize Hype-V replica, will that also replicate the contents within the VM (ie. AD, file shares, permisisons etc) so it'll be like for like at the additional site?

    If it didn't replicate the contents, what would it be replicating? The VM is a file, the file is copied. It doesn't look through and arbitrarily destroy data inside the file.

    That would certainly make backing up WAY more interesting. . .


  • Service Provider

    @dustinb3403 said in Hyper V replica VS DFS:

    @scottalanmiller said in Hyper V replica VS DFS:

    @joel said in Hyper V replica VS DFS:

    If we utilize Hype-V replica, will that also replicate the contents within the VM (ie. AD, file shares, permisisons etc) so it'll be like for like at the additional site?

    If it didn't replicate the contents, what would it be replicating? The VM is a file, the file is copied. It doesn't look through and arbitrarily destroy data inside the file.

    That would certainly make backing up WAY more interesting. . .

    All kinds of new challenges there.


  • Service Provider

    Dash is correct, if you tell us your goal we can help you a lot more than answering under the hood behavioural questions about different technologies.



  • @scottalanmiller said in Hyper V replica VS DFS:

    @dustinb3403 said in Hyper V replica VS DFS:

    @scottalanmiller said in Hyper V replica VS DFS:

    @joel said in Hyper V replica VS DFS:

    If we utilize Hype-V replica, will that also replicate the contents within the VM (ie. AD, file shares, permisisons etc) so it'll be like for like at the additional site?

    If it didn't replicate the contents, what would it be replicating? The VM is a file, the file is copied. It doesn't look through and arbitrarily destroy data inside the file.

    That would certainly make backing up WAY more interesting. . .

    All kinds of new challenges there.

    Well we have 1/4 of that file and 100% of this file. . .



  • Also remember, replica/DFS is not a backup. This is useful if you are using it for some sort of DR, but its not a backup (just saying in case this was for a backup).



  • @jimmy9008 said in Hyper V replica VS DFS:

    Also remember, replica/DFS is not a backup. This is useful if you are using it for some sort of DR, but its not a backup (just saying in case this was for a backup).

    It can be used as hardware redundancy and to speed up file access in remote locations.



  • @tim_g said in Hyper V replica VS DFS:

    @jimmy9008 said in Hyper V replica VS DFS:

    Also remember, replica/DFS is not a backup. This is useful if you are using it for some sort of DR, but its not a backup (just saying in case this was for a backup).

    It can be used as hardware redundancy and to speed up file access in remote locations.

    Yes, it has many uses. But my point was its not a backup. So, wanted to make sure this wasn't in place for a backup.



  • @jimmy9008 said in Hyper V replica VS DFS:

    @tim_g said in Hyper V replica VS DFS:

    @jimmy9008 said in Hyper V replica VS DFS:

    Also remember, replica/DFS is not a backup. This is useful if you are using it for some sort of DR, but its not a backup (just saying in case this was for a backup).

    It can be used as hardware redundancy and to speed up file access in remote locations.

    Yes, it has many uses. But my point was its not a backup. So, wanted to make sure this wasn't in place for a backup.

    Good call! He did mention a secondary offsite server... but never mentioned the reason. Could be for backup?



  • @tim_g said in Hyper V replica VS DFS:

    @jimmy9008 said in Hyper V replica VS DFS:

    @tim_g said in Hyper V replica VS DFS:

    @jimmy9008 said in Hyper V replica VS DFS:

    Also remember, replica/DFS is not a backup. This is useful if you are using it for some sort of DR, but its not a backup (just saying in case this was for a backup).

    It can be used as hardware redundancy and to speed up file access in remote locations.

    Yes, it has many uses. But my point was its not a backup. So, wanted to make sure this wasn't in place for a backup.

    Good call! He did mention a secondary offsite server... but never mentioned the reason. Could be for backup?

    My thoughts exactly. Hence saying what I said ;)

    If using replica from A -> B, and if they think its a backup.... just wait for the VM on A to get ransomware... and bad times as yep - B also has the locked files.

    Hyper-V Replica is not a backup. Its a DR type thing. DFS is not a backup, its a file distribution system.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to MangoLassi was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.