File Replication Service - Replication Pro/Cons

Does anyone use DFS and FRS to provide fail over data protection? In case
the main file server goes down, users can be redirected over to the backup
file server which will have an exact copy of the data from the main file
server? are their any pros/cons? Max. file sizes that FRS supports etc? I
have a few files that are over 200GB in size that will be replicated
nightly, any problems with this? The staging area has been modified to 250GB
on both servers.

Your best bet is to use the new DFS Replication engine in R2--it's a vast
improvement over FRS. One major improvement is the ability to replicate just
the changes--versus the entire file--when a file changes. FRS as you know
will replicate the entire file. See www.microsoft.com/dfs for details. And
yes, DFS is a great solution for providing the failover you're looking for.
Several improvements were made in W2K3 SP1 that provide greater flexibility,
such as target priority and client failback.



--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.

Want to learn more about Windows Server file and storage technologies? Visit
our team blog at http://blogs.technet.com/filecab/default.aspx.


"Gabe Matteson" <gmattesonATinqueryDOTbiz> wrote in message
news:utWQ%23Wn4GHA.4256@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> Does anyone use DFS and FRS to provide fail over data protection? In case
> the main file server goes down, users can be redirected over to the backup
> file server which will have an exact copy of the data from the main file
> server? are their any pros/cons? Max. file sizes that FRS supports etc? I
> have a few files that are over 200GB in size that will be replicated
> nightly, any problems with this? The staging area has been modified to
> 250GB on both servers.
>