chakotay2MemberMay 07, 2011 at 5:39 pm #154538
I currently have only one Server (I know that isn’t good, read on, we are fixing it). That server holds Active Directory Domain Services, DNS (AD Integrated), and DHCP. It also holds our the data files for the business (a Veterinary Clinic).
It uses Raid 1 with two 150 GB drives for the C: (OS) drive, and two 500 GB drives for the D: (Data files) drive. It also has redundant power supplies, we backup every night to an external drive, and we also use online backup.
I know that we are in need of adding a second server and now have the money to do so. The system we use for recordkeeping basically runs on the server. To explain better, there is no client software, you browse to a network share (NOT a mapped drive), select the .exe program file, and send shortcut to desktop. Unfortunately this is the most advanced vet practice software on the market so we are stuck with it.
I want to have as much fault tolerance as possible in this situation (given our limited budget). I have gotten two suggestions and am asking the users of this forum for clarification on what the better option may be. A local Microsoft trainer (who I trust very much) suggested setting up DFS on both machines. The software vendor (who isn’t super at tech support, I don’t have a lot of trust in, but they are the vendors so I better listen) said they don’t recommend dfs and instead recommend doing a one way sync with a program like vice versa or syncback and setting it to sync every 30 mins or so. We currently own Syncback so that would be my preference between the two if DFS isn’t recommended by this group – unless vice versa would work much better.
My main goal is to maximize uptime and reduce the risk of data corruption. Could I get some insight on what you would do in this circumstance please?
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.