Small Business Server 2003 to 2012 R2 Migration and Virtualized Domain Controller Questions
-
@IRJ said:
Did anyone mention DFS to you Garak?
During your transition period you could use DFS Replication to keep shares synced up between the two servers.
Yes...it has been mentioned but my list has been too full to think of anything else...I'm a solo IT shop, so I am still handling workstation issues, office equipment issues, cell phones, software coding issues...juggling!
-
@garak0410 said:
@IRJ said:
Did anyone mention DFS to you Garak?
During your transition period you could use DFS Replication to keep shares synced up between the two servers.
Yes...it has been mentioned but my list has been too full to think of anything else...I'm a solo IT shop, so I am still handling workstation issues, office equipment issues, cell phones, software coding issues...juggling!
That said...I am checking it out now...I may work late tonight...tomorrow is my official move to new servers evening...
-
Do you feel one of these ways is better than the other, any if so, why?
e:\all\accounting = \servername\accounting
e:\all\it = \servername\it
e:\all\hr = \servername\hr
etcHere is the other option I mentioned above
e:\all = \servername\all
and you connect your drive letters like this
net use p: \servername\all\accounting
net use i: \servername\all\it
net use h: \servername\all\hr -
@Dashrender said:
Do you feel one of these ways is better than the other, any if so, why?
e:\all\accounting = \servername\accounting
e:\all\it = \servername\it
e:\all\hr = \servername\hr
etcHere is the other option I mentioned above
e:\all = \servername\all
and you connect your drive letters like this
net use p: \servername\all\accounting
net use i: \servername\all\it
net use h: \servername\all\hrThere are good times for each. The first set is based off of many shares and the later off of a single one. This really comes down to how you want to manage security. If you need granular share-level security you need many shares. But if you don't, and generally you don't, I would do the "one share" method to make things simpler.
-
@scottalanmiller
What do you think about using this post's method for copying over the shares?
http://www.geeksaresexy.net/2007/06/27/how-to-move-windows-shares-from-one-computer-to-another/In Garak's case he'll have to edit the exported REG file from the old server because he's moving from
to E:I've done this before and it works, but I don't recall is if it brings the Share ACL along?
-
Quick Update - Robocopy is STILL copying the files...it is under 1TB for sure but upwards around 800-900 GB. Our biggest software suite generates a TON of files so it is the sheer amount of files I believe. It is on the last huge directory so should pick up after it is complete.
The file server VM has been allowed 8GB (and dynamic) memory it is hovering around 90% right now:
The biggest culprit is Symantec Endpoint, using about 214MB and it's SQL Anywhere Embedded Database about 134MB. That is actually normal and what it shows on the current server. Then there is other processes with negligible memory use. So, could it be from the file copying? I don't see how what I show to add up to 7GB of memory use.
-
Turn off AV during the transfer
-
@garak0410 said:
Quick Update - Robocopy is STILL copying the files...it is under 1TB for sure but upwards around 800-900 GB. Our biggest software suite generates a TON of files so it is the sheer amount of files I believe. It is on the last huge directory so should pick up after it is complete.
The file server VM has been allowed 8GB (and dynamic) memory it is hovering around 90% right now:
The biggest culprit is Symantec Endpoint, using about 214MB and it's SQL Anywhere Embedded Database about 134MB. That is actually normal and what it shows on the current server. Then there is other processes with negligible memory use. So, could it be from the file copying? I don't see how what I show to add up to 7GB of memory use.
We use SEPM and I hate it. I can't wait till we finally pull the plug on it.
-
Turned off Symantec and it has gotten worse and can't reboot due to Robocopy...I do not really see any other reason for the high memory usage...
-
Another Screen Shot...
In contrast, the Host shows very little wear on it...
-
File transfers should use all available memory. Nothing odd there.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
File transfers should use all available memory. Nothing odd there.
So noted. Just wish it showed up in task manager...I'll be patient...we have than less than 1/3 left to copy...and then a run with the /XO command tonight to get what is new or changed.
-
After first Robocopy completed, I rebooted my VM for my file server. Immediately, it is at 95% memory usage (7.5 GB out of 8GB). I turned it off, turned DYNAMIC memory OFF and bam...looks much better.
-
Awesome
-
Big round of applause for all of the tips I got here. It looks like my file server migration went quite well. A few minor things today:
As it would happen, we had a power surge and the battery backups for the old server (domain controller) both went nuts and turned the server off. I assume since the other roles haven't been officially moved to the new Domain Controller is why no one had any DNS services.
One of our VBA programs has messy, messy code and it's all over the place. Any job made prior to the file server would not open unless I restored sharing to the folder on the old server that contains the code for this project. So, the workaround works but adding this fix to my list.
Beyond some users needing to log out and in a few times to get their login scripts right and some typos I made in the script,, I couldn't be happier.
I guess I will be planning on the eventual demotion of the old DC...
-
Once you think you have everything moved off the old server, turn it off for a few days (before you move the FSMO roles) You don't need the server with the roles running all the time (OK maybe PDC emulator might be nice to keep live). If there are no complaints you know you are good to go moving the FSMO roles and turning the old server off.
-
DNS is not affected by roles. DNS is not tied to AD. Two separate services. Are you sure that people's desktop are pointing to the new machine for DNS? Use nslookup to test.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
DNS is not affected by roles. DNS is not tied to AD. Two separate services. Are you sure that people's desktop are pointing to the new machine for DNS? Use nslookup to test.
Agreed...now that I've had time to think, this may go back to my static assignments and not using DHCP...adding to list...
-
that would do it. -
Wow. A ton of posts from beginning to end of this process. I almost feel like the community just helped deliver a baby.
