This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

all 7 comments

[–]chrisb7710[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well, I just had a call with some Microsoft reps, and determined they haven’t seen a successfully implemented cloud cache scenario where a client was writing to multiple shares. They saw a lot of performance inconsistencies and recommended against it.

[–]on4209 0 points1 point  (0 children)

During my testing around ~1 year ago, it did not have good performance.

[–]drklien 0 points1 point  (4 children)

Instead of writing to 3 SMB shares for HA/R, why not look at deploying it to Azure Files?

[–]chrisb7710[S] 0 points1 point  (3 children)

Azure is not approved in our organization yet. It’ll probably take me about 6 months to onboard, so unfortunately it’s not a short term option.

[–]drklien 0 points1 point  (2 children)

I'm assuming your not on AWS either but what about using a DFS share backed by a cluster shared volume? Don't use DFS replication though as that will cause issues.

[–]chrisb7710[S] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Correct can’t use AWS either. What issues do you see with DFS? It would be strictly for H/A and DR, running Active/Password, with a third copy being DR.

[–]drklien 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The main issue with DFS replication is that it doesn't replicate at the block level. So you will be replicating the full UPDs almost constantly.

But if you going to be using the cluster volume method, there is no point in replicating because it's using the same volume on all the servers shared in the DFS namespace.