File server on cluster

Hi
I have failover cluster on win server 2008 R2 that host file service fro 2 nodes (File1 , File2)
I make failover with no issues but once i failover to file server1 some users cannot access the shared volumes
some users when they make logoff and login they also cannot access the shared volumes
what was this issue ?
need help and how can i monitoring ?
MCP MCSA MCSE MCT MCTS CCNA

Hi Yasser Mohamed Abdel Moneim,
In file server cluster if we need to create the share folder we need to use the failover clsuster manager, did you create the share folder with clsuter manager?
The related KB:
Create a Shared Folder in a Clustered File Server
https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc732302.aspx?f=255&MSPPError=-2147217396
I’m glad to be of help to you!
Please remember to mark the replies as answers if they help and unmark them if they provide no help. If you have feedback for TechNet Support, contact [email protected]
This is not the issue at all
It is working since 1 week the issue when we make failover the shared volume become not accessible
MCP MCSA MCSE MCT MCTS CCNA

Similar Messages

File Server Failover Cluster without shared disks

i have two servers that i wish to cluster as my Hyper V hosts and also two file servers each with 10 4TB SATA disks, all i have read about implementing high availability at the storage level involves clustering the file servers (e.g SOFS) which require external
shared storage that the servers in the cluster can access directly. i do not have external storage and do not have budget for it.
Is it possible to implement some for of HA with windows server 2012 R2 file servers without shared storage? for example is it possible to cluster the servers and have data on one server mirrored real-time to the other server such that if one server goes
down, the other server will take over processing storage request using the mirrored data?
i intend to use the storage to host VMs for Hyper V fail-over cluster and an SQL server cluster. they will access the shared on the file server through SMB
each file server also has 144GB SSD, how can i use it to improve performance?

i have two servers that i wish to cluster as my Hyper V hosts and also two file servers each with 10 4TB SATA disks, all i have read about implementing high availability at the storage level involves clustering the file servers (e.g SOFS) which require external
shared storage that the servers in the cluster can access directly. i do not have external storage and do not have budget for it.
Is it possible to implement some for of HA with windows server 2012 R2 file servers without shared storage? for example is it possible to cluster the servers and have data on one server mirrored real-time to the other server such that if one server goes
down, the other server will take over processing storage request using the mirrored data?
i intend to use the storage to host VMs for Hyper V fail-over cluster and an SQL server cluster. they will access the shared on the file server through SMB
each file server also has 144GB SSD, how can i use it to improve performance?
There are two ways for you to go:
1) Build a cluster w/o shared storage using MSFT upcoming version of Windows (yes, finally they have that feature and tons of other cool stuff). We've recently build both Scale-Out File Server serving Hyper-V cluster and standard general-purpose File Server
cluster with this version. I'll blog next week edited content (you can drop me a message to get drafts right now) or you can use Dave's blog who was the first one I know who build it and posted, see :
Windows Server Technical Preview (Storage Replica)
http://clusteringformeremortals.com
Feature you should be interested in it Storage Replica. Official guide is here:
Storage Replica Guide
http://blogs.technet.com/b/filecab/archive/2014/10/07/storage-replica-guide-released-for-windows-server-technical-preview.aspx
Will do things like on the picture below:
Just be aware: feature is new, build is preview (not even beta) so failover does not happen transparently (even with CA feature of SMB 3.0 enabled). However I think tuning timeout and improving I/O performance will fix that. SoFS failover is transparent
even right away.
2) If you cannot wait 9-12 months from now (hope MSFT is not going to delay their release) and you're not happy with a very basic functionality MSFT had put there (active-passive design, no RAM cache, requirement for separated storage, system/boot and dedicated
log disks where SSD is assumed) you can get advanced stuff with a third-party software doing things similar to the picture below:
So it will basically "mirror" some part of your storage (can be even directly-accessed file on your only system/boot disk) between hypervisor or just Windows hosts creating fault-tolerant and distributed SAN volume with optimal SMB3/NFS shares.
For more details see:
StarWind Virtual SAN
http://www.starwindsoftware.com/starwind-virtual-san/
There are other guys who do similar things but as you want file server (no virtualization?) most of them who are Linux/FreeBSD/Solaris-based and VM-running are out and you need to check for native Windows implementations. Guess SteelEye DataKeeper (that's
Dave who blogged about Storage Replica File Server) and DataCore.
Good luck :)
StarWind VSAN [Virtual SAN] clusters Hyper-V without SAS, Fibre Channel, SMB 3.0 or iSCSI, uses Ethernet to mirror internally mounted SATA disks between hosts.

Selecting VHDx as storage for File Server Role (Failover Cluster 2012 R2)

Is it possible to select an already existing (offline) VHD or VHDX as storage when creating the "File Server" role? Reason I want to do that is because I already have a file server setup as a virtual machine and causing issues so my company
decided to make the change towards a File Server role.
Thank you
David

Hi David,
Do you mean you configured it to file server failover cluster via "High Availability Wizard" ?
I think you need to choose a shared volume between two nodes to achieve high availability .
Please refer to following link :
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc731844(v=WS.10).aspx
If you do not select a shared volume , I think there is no difference than sharing a mounted VHDX file on a standalone file server .
I would suggest to copy these files to CSV and share them .
Hope it helps
Best Regards
Elton Ji
We
are trying to better understand customer views on social support experience, so your participation in this
interview project would be greatly appreciated if you have time.
Thanks for helping make community forums a great place.

Failover cluster File Server role best practices

We recently implemented a Hyper-V Server Core 2012 R2 cluster with the sole purpose to run our server environment. I started with our file servers and decided to create multiple file servers and put them in a cluster for high
availability. So now I have a cluster of VMs, which I have now learned is called a guest cluster, and I added the File Server role to this cluster. It then struck me that I could have just as easily created the File Server role under my Hyper-V
Server cluster and removed this extra virtual layer.
I'm reaching out to this community to see if there are any best practices on using the File Server role. Are there any benefits to having a guest cluster provide file shares? Or am I making things overly complicated for no reason?
Just to be clear, I'm just trying to make a simple Windows file server with folder shares that have security enabled on them for users to access internally. I'm using Hyper-V Core server 2012 R2 on my physical servers and right now I have Windows
Server Standard 2012 R2 on the VMs in the guest cluster.
Thanks for any information you can provide.

Hi,
Generally with Hyper-V VMs available, we will install all roles into virtual machines as that will be easy for management purpose.
In your situation the host system is a server core, so it seems that manage file shares with a GUI is much better.
I cannot find an article specifically regarding "best practices of setting up failover cluster". Here are 2 articles regarding build guest cluster (you have already done) and steps to create a file server cluster.
Hyper-V Guest Clustering Step-by-Step Guide
http://blogs.technet.com/b/mghazai/archive/2009/12/12/hyper-v-guest-clustering-step-by-step-guide.aspx
Failover Cluster Step-by-Step Guide: Configuring a Two-Node File Server Failover Cluster
https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc731844(v=ws.10).aspx
Please remember to mark the replies as answers if they help and un-mark them if they provide no help. If you have feedback for TechNet Support, contact [email protected]

Mac10.x client can't connect to File Server on Windows2008 Failover Cluster

Installation of a cluster was made according to the document "Failover Cluster Step-by-Step Guide: Configuring a Two-Node File Server Failover Cluster " http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc731844.aspx.
My Mac OS X 10.5.2 and Mac OS X 10.4.11 clients be able to connect to a non-cluster file server on a Windows 2008 (the File Services role) and also to old file cluster on a Windows 2003.
Why Mac clients can't connect to Windows 2008 Failover Cluster?

Are you running a firewall on the Macs. If yes does it work with out the firewall? If it works with out the firewall that means you will have to create a custom ipf rule which includes the both the physical an virtual IP addresses of your cluster.

File Server Storage Planning

I am planning a large file server and I would like your advice and suggestions. We currently have 4TB of data and I anticipate, based on growth history, we will grow to 25TB within the next 5 years. I am planning our storage infrastructure for this.
Our files are 95% .jpg files and 5% word documents, excel docs and other misc. documents. We have 2 servers. One in building A and one in Building B (DR Site) that are connected via GB LAN. The plan is to replicate the data from serverA
to ServerB using DFSR. This will provide high availability in the event of a failure on ServerA. We also have a 3rd server in buildingB that is a DPM2010 server which will backup this data.
I am trying to decide between to options and would like to know your input and advise.
Option 1: Split our data into 4 volumes and then grow those volumes over time by adding storage and spanning each disk as necessary.
Option 2: Put all data on the same volume and grow that one volume over time by adding storage and spanning the disk.
Taking into account our scenario, which decision do you recommend and why?

Hi!
You have quite a few questions inside that question. :-)
To evaluate the impact of using DFS-Replication, you need to look into the rate of change of the files, not exactly the total capacity or the number of files. DFS-R has some known limitations (for instance, you can't replicate open files). Also note that,
when using DFS, both server are running and available to users. Users in building A will go to the server in building A and users in building B will go to the server in building B (if you configure your sites and subnets correctly in Active Direction). That
could potentially lead to a replication conflict if a user in building A and a user in building B edit the same file at the same time. In that case, the last writer will win the conflict.
For true high availability, you need to use a File Server Failover Cluster with a SAN for shared storage. Since you mention different builds, you need to have two SAN solutions (one in each building) and a SAN-based solution to replicate the storage
between them. With a failover cluster, your specific file share will be running in only one of the buildings. If the cluster resource is online on building A, users from both buildings will access tthe share on that server and the server in building B will
only take over that resource in case of a failure of the server in building A.
In regards to using one or multiple volumes, it's really your call. Having multiple volumes will require multiple replication groups (if using DFS-R) or multiple cluster disks (if using Failover Cluster). This added configuration might pay off in giving
you more flexibility. For instance, you could have different cluster groups that could be onlined on different cluster nodes. It also could influence how you plan your backups. You can mask the complexity of having multiple volumes and even multiple file servers
from the end users by using DFS-Namespaces.
DPM 2010 would work with either solution.
Jose

Shadow Copies on 2012 R2 File Server Cluster

Hello all!
I've inherited a two node physical 2012 R2 file server cluster that contains a few SMB shares on a single clustered disk. I'd like to enable shadow copies for this shared disk but want to store the shadow copy data on its own shared disk
as per shadow copy best practices (at least on non-clustered file servers).
I created a second cluster disk, assigned it to the same resources as the SMB clustered disk.
Now historically I've enabled shadow copies through computer management but I want to ensure the shadow copies are cluster aware so in the Failover Cluster Manager I open Storage | Disks and right click the SMB cluster disk and click the Shadow Copies tab.
From the tab I can Enable shadow copies, this sounds like what I'm looking for, unfortunately it does not give me an option to choose a disk/volume to store my shadow copy data, so this can't be right.
My next step was to connect computer management to the cluster virtual server name (NOCFS4) and through the System Tools | Shared Folders | All Tasks | Configure Shadow Copies it shows me the correct number of shares on the SMB cluster disk plus
I can see the Settings button for configuring the location and size limit for shadow copies, however once I tweak the shadow copy location and size settings, click Ok and click Enable to turn on the shadow copies I get a long pause and an error about
not being able to create a schedule. So it seems connecting to the cluster virtual object is not the answer either.
That leaves using computer management to connect to one of the physical server nodes of the cluster. When I open the shadow copy interface on the physical node I note that it shows a 0 for the number of shares it detects on the SMB clustered disk.
This doesn't surprise me since this interface isn't cluster resource aware.
So I'm stuck. Does anyone know the "Microsoft way" to enable shadow copies on a clustered disk while storing the shadow copy data on a second cluster disk both attached to the same cluster resource?

Hi guys
I spotted exactly same problem right now on Windows 2012 R2 with latest updates.
Enabling Shadow Copy via Cluster Manager on disk will enable schedule and snapshots but schedule is not-cluster aware (is created locally on node) and "Previous Versions" are visible only locally but not via shared folders (UNC path accesible by
clients)
When I spotted this behavior I tried different way going via Computer Management and cluster resource name but console always hangs for me when using "Configure Shadow Copies". After many minutes configuration window is opened (Hurray!) but any
action there will hang whole console again. Enabling Shadow Copies will fail with "0x80004005: Unspecified
error" for creating scheduled task but "Next Run Time" column still shows "Disabled". Checking disk resource via Cluster Manager shows it is enabled and ?local? scheduled task is created.
Computer management console still shows DISABLED and any action freezes whole console (only when cluster resource name is used).
This fix I found, unfortunately, is not applicable to 2012 R2 OS: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/2894464
To sum up there is a major bug in MS implementation in Shadow Copies for Shared Folders when clustering is used or it is still not supported in 2012 R2? Doing it outside cluster works as it should (without freezes and Previous Versions are available via
UNC)
There is no documentation about FileServer Clustering on 2012(R2) unfortunately.
Could someone from MS clarify it?
Many thanks
Filip
EDIT:
Ok, one correction:
Scheduled task is not created in "Failover Clustering" hive of Scheduled tasks as user may expect but failover of fileshare to other node will unregister/reregister it on active node only.

Server 2012 File Server Cluster Shadow Copies Disappear Some Time After Failover

Hello,
I've seen similar questions posted on here before however I have yet to find a solution that worked for us so I'm adding my process in hopes someone can point out where I went wrong.
The problem: After failover, shadow copies are only available for a short time on the secondary server. Before the task to create new shadow copies happens the shadow copies are deleted. Failing back shows them missing on the primary server as
well when this happens.
We have a 2 node (hereafter server1 and server2) cluster with a quorum disk. There are 8 disk resources which are mapped to the cluster via iScsi. 4 of these disks are setup as storage and the other 4 are currently set up as shadow copy volumes
for their respective storage volume.
Previously we weren't using separate shadow copy volumes and seeing the same issue described in the topic title. I followed two other topics on here that seemed close and then setup the separate shadow copy volumes however it has yet to alleviate the
issue. These are the two other topics :
Topic 1: https://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/windowsserver/en-US/ba0d2568-53ac-4523-a49e-4e453d14627f/failover-cluster-server-file-server-role-is-clustered-shadow-copies-do-not-seem-to-travel-to?forum=winserverClustering
Topic 2: https://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/windowsserver/en-US/c884c31b-a50e-4c9d-96f3-119e347a61e8/shadow-copies-missing-after-failover-on-2008-r2-cluster
After reading both of those topics I did the following:
1) Add the 4 new volumes to the cluster for shadow copies
2) Made each storage volume dependent on it's shadow copy volume in FCM
3) Went to the currently active node directly and opened up "My Computer", I then went to the properties of each storage volume and set up shadow copies to go to the respective shadow copy volume drive letter with correct size for spacing, etc.
4) I then went back to FCM and right clicked on the corresponding storage volume and choose "Configure Shadow Copy" and set the schedule for 12:00 noon and 5:00 PM.
5) I noticed that on the nodes the task was created and that the task would failover between the nodes and appeared correct.
6) Everything appears to failover correctly, all volumes come up, drive letters are same, shadow copy storage settings are the same, and 4 scheduled tasks for shadow copy appear on the current node after failover.
Thinking everything was setup according to best practice I did some testing by changing file contents throughout the day making sure that previous versions were created as scheduled on server1. I then rebooted Server1 to simulate failure. Server2
picked up the role within about 10 seconds and files were avaiable. I checked and I could still see previous versions for the files after failover that were created on server1. Unfortunately that didn't last as the next day before noon I was going
to make more changes to files to ensure that not only could we see the shadow copies that were created when Server1 owned the file server role but also that the copies created on Server2 would be seen on failback. I was disappointed to discover that
the shadow copies were all gone and failing back didn't produce them either.
Does anyone have any insight into this issue? I must be missing a switch somewhere or perhaps this isn't even possible with our cluster type based on this: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc779378%28v=ws.10%29.aspx
Now here's an interesting part, shadow copies on 1 of our 4 volumes have been retained from both nodes through the testing, but I can't figure out what makes it different though I do suspect that perhaps the "Disk#s" in computer management / disk
management perhaps need to be the same between servers? For example, on server 1 the disk #s for cluster volume 1 might be "Disk4" but on server 2 the same volume might be called "Disk7", however I think that operations like this
and shadow copy are based on the disk GUID and perhaps this shouldn't matter.
Edit, checked on the disk numbers, I see no correlation between what I'm seeing in shadow copy and what is happening to the numbers. All other items, quotas, etc fail and work correctly despite these diffs:
Disk Numbers on Server 1:
Format: "shadow/storerelation volume = Disk Number"
aHome storage1 = 16
aShared storage2 = 09
sHome storage3 = 01
sShared storage4 = 04
aHome shadow1 = 10
aShared shadow2 = 11
sHome shadow3 = 02
sShared shadow4 = 05
Disk numbers on Server 2:
aHome storage1 = 16 (SAME)
aShared storage2 = 04 (DIFF)
sHome storage3 = 05 (DIFF)
sShared storage4 = 08 (DIFF)
aHome shadow1 = 10 (SAME)
aShared shadow2 = 11 (SAME)
sHome shadow3 = 06 (DIFF)
sShared shadow4 = 09 (DIFF)
Thanks in advance for your assistance/guidance on this matter!

Hello Alex,
Thank you for your reply. I will go through your questions in order as best I can, though I'm not the backup expert here.
1) "Did you see any event ID when the VSS fail?
please offer us more information about your environment, such as what type backup you are using the soft ware based or hard ware VSS device."
I saw a number of events on inspection. Interestingly enough, the event ID 60 issues did not occur on the drive where shadow copies did remain after the two reboots. I'm putting my event notes in a code block to try to preserve formatting/readability.
I've written down events from both server 1 and 2 in this code block, documenting the first reboot causing the role to move to server 2 and then the second reboot going back to server 1:
JANUARY 2
9:34:20 PM - Server 1 - Event ID: 1074 - INFO - Source: User 32 - Standard reboot request from explorer.exe (Initiated by me)
9:34:21 PM - Server 1 - Event ID: 7036 - INFO - Source: Service Control Manager - "The Volume Shadow Copy service entered the running state."
9:34:21 PM - Server 1 - Event ID: 60 - ERROR - Source: volsnap - "The description for Event ID 60 from source volsnap cannot be found. Either the component that raises this event is not installed on your local computer or the installation is corrupted. You can install or repair the component on the local computer.
If the event originated on another computer, the display information had to be saved with the event.
The following information was included with the event:
\Device\HarddiskVolumeShadowCopy49
F:
T:
The locale specific resource for the desired message is not present"
9:34:21 PM - Server 1 - Event ID 60 - ERROR - Source: volsnap - "The description for Event ID 60 from source volsnap cannot be found. Either the component that raises this event is not installed on your local computer or the installation is corrupted. You can install or repair the component on the local computer.
If the event originated on another computer, the display information had to be saved with the event.
The following information was included with the event:
\Device\HarddiskVolumeShadowCopy1
H:
V:
The locale specific resource for the desired message is not present"
***The above event repeats with only the number changing, drive letters stay same, citing VolumeShadowCopy# numbers 6, 13, 18, 22, 27, 32, 38, 41, 45, 51,
9:34:21 PM - Server 1 - Event ID: 60 - ERROR - Source: volsnap - "The description for Event ID 60 from source volsnap cannot be found. Either the component that raises this event is not installed on your local computer or the installation is corrupted. You can install or repair the component on the local computer.
If the event originated on another computer, the display information had to be saved with the event.
The following information was included with the event:
\Device\HarddiskVolumeShadowCopy4
E:
S:
The locale specific resource for the desired message is not present"
***The above event repeats with only the number changing, drive letters stay same, citing VolumeShadowCopy# numbers 5, 10, 19, 21, 25, 29, 37, 40, 46, 48, 48
9:34:28 PM - Server 1 - Event ID: 7036 - INFO - Source: Service Control Manager - "The NetBackup Legacy Network Service service entered the stopped state."
9:34:28 PM - Server 1 - Event ID: 7036 - INFO - Source: Service Control Manager - "The Volume Shadow Copy service entered the stopped state.""
9:34:29 PM - Server 1 - Event ID: 7036 - INFO - Source: Service Control Manager - "The NetBackup Client Service service entered the stopped state."
9:34:30 PM - Server 1 - Event ID: 7036 - INFO - Source: Service Control Manager - "The NetBackup Discovery Framework service entered the stopped state."
10:44:07 PM - Server 2 - Event ID: 7036 - INFO - Source: Service Control Manager - "The Volume Shadow Copy service entered the running state."
10:44:08 PM - Server 2 - Event ID: 7036 - INFO - Source: Service Control Manager - "The Microsoft Software Shadow Copy Provider service entered the running state."
10:45:01 PM - Server 2 - Event ID: 48 - ERROR - Source: bxois - "Target failed to respond in time to a NOP request."
10:45:01 PM - Server 2 - Event ID: 20 - ERROR - Source: bxois - "Connection to the target was lost. The initiator will attempt to retry the connection."
10:45:01 PM - Server 2 - Event ID: 153 - WARN - Source: disk - "The IO operation at logical block address 0x146d2c580 for Disk 7 was retried."
10:45:03 PM - Server 2 - Event ID: 34 - INFO - Source: bxois - "A connection to the target was lost, but Initiator successfully reconnected to the target. Dump data contains the target name."
JANUARY 3
At around 2:30 I reboot Server 2, seeing that shadow copy was missing after previous failure. Here are the relevant events from the flip back to server 1.
2:30:34 PM - Server 2 - Event ID: 60 - ERROR - Source: volsnap - "The description for Event ID 60 from source volsnap cannot be found. Either the component that raises this event is not installed on your local computer or the installation is corrupted. You can install or repair the component on the local computer.
If the event originated on another computer, the display information had to be saved with the event.
The following information was included with the event:
\Device\HarddiskVolumeShadowCopy24
F:
T:
The locale specific resource for the desired message is not present"
2:30:34 PM - Server 2 - Event ID: 60 - ERROR - Source: volsnap - "The description for Event ID 60 from source volsnap cannot be found. Either the component that raises this event is not installed on your local computer or the installation is corrupted. You can install or repair the component on the local computer.
If the event originated on another computer, the display information had to be saved with the event.
The following information was included with the event:
\Device\HarddiskVolumeShadowCopy23
E:
S:
The locale specific resource for the desired message is not present"
We are using Symantec NetBackup. The client agent is installed on both server1 and 2. We're backing them up based on the complete drive letter for each storage volume (this makes recovery easier). I believe this is what you would call "software
based VSS". We don't have the infrastructure/setup to do hardware based snapshots. The drives reside on a compellent san mapped to the cluster via iScsi.
2) "Confirm the following registry is exist:
- HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\System\CurrentControlSet\Services\VSS\Settings"
The key is there, however the DWORD value is not, would that mean that the
default value is being used at this point?

Which role do I need DFS or File server on fail over cluster server 2012 R2?

what I want to achieve is that I want to share all my user data files in a central location and to be highly available all the time whether it's a general share or folder redirection data. BUT I'm a bit confused; I have fail over cluster set-up
on server 2012, now I would like to add DFS as a role but than we have another role called File server and virtually it does the same thing as DFS? Means it creates a namespace share that can be access even one of the nodes goes down. Now I am thinking is
that DFS does the replication between two physical location but fail over cluster works slightly differently and with file server it pretty much does the same thing except for replicating data from one drive to another. Now what do you suggest I do or
did I get the concept wrong like a noob?

DFS and Failover Clustering for file shares provides a similar end result for file access, but they are significantly different implementations.
Clustering provides high availability to files by presenting shared access to set a files served from a cluster. With 2012 R2 Microsoft added the ability to create a Scale-out File Server that even allows all nodes of the cluster to server access to
the files for a higher level of performance and other great things. Bottom line with Failover Clusters for files is that there is a single copy of the file presented from the cluster.
DFS on the other hand provides high availability to files by presenting multiple copies of the file by making a copy in two or more locations and presenting a naming space that allows access to the file through any of the network paths. DFS works very
well for files that are primarily read-only. When you get into a situation where there is a lot of updating of the shared files, DFS is not a very good solution. There are ways to implement DFS for read/write files, but it generally requires a
good knowledge of how the files are used and how you want to manage them.
The key to answering your question comes in your first sentence "I want to share all my user data files in a central location and to be highly available all the time". My initial reaction to this is that central location means Failover Cluster
- there is only a single copy of the file. However, "all the time" can be compromised by network failures to the central site. Remote sites would not have access if they can't access the central site. DFS provides the ability to
have copies remotely, but then if you allow updating at multiple sites, you have to manage the merging of the changes, among other things.
. : | : . : | : . tim

Can anyone help me?Creating the shadow copies in the file server cluster ,there are some errors occured, OS version is WSS 2012

I construct a failover cluster(file server,AP module) for sharing files by WSS 2012,and I want to use the shadow copies to backup my data,but when making a shadow copies on the volume which is added to the cluster(not the CSV,just add
it to the cluster and use it to share files,it plays the role of file server),there are some errors occured, these errors result in the shadow copies failed,error likes the following pictures:
1: the disk F is added to the cluster,first I make the shadow copies by click the right key of mouse on the disk F,and chouse the configeration shadow copies,and click the settings, then click the schedule , and I wait just a few seconds, the error is appeared,like
this picture 1, the wait operation timed out,and then ,
I click the schedule button once again,a different error occured,like the following picture," the object already exists",if i don't set the schedule at first ,use the default shedule,and click the enable button also the same error must
accure
but the only diffrence is that, a shadow copy time point is created, also ,you can make the shadow copies by click " create now", that is creating the shadow copies manually. Although it can succesfully make the shadow copies, but when I select
a time point to revert, error occured, "A volume that contains operating system files or resides on a cluster shared disk cannot be reverted"
In a word,all the errors above make the shadow copies by schedulling failed,except making the shadow copies manually,but what makes me confused is that I have ever maked the shadow copies succesfully by schedul a policy,I don't know what makes it succesful,
it's small probability, most of time ,it's failed.No matter what kind of situation, revert must be failed.
I'm sorry for my pool english , it's the first time for me getting help in forum by english ,I don't know if I descripe my question clearly, also ,other method like the link
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc784118(v=ws.10).aspx I have tried,but the same errors occured.Can anyone tell me How can I make the shadow copies in File Server
cluster（AP module）？And I make a mistake in operating？ Looking forward for your reply.Thanks!

Hi,
Please check the following 2 places:
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Cluster\Tasks
C:\Windows\System32\Tasks
First please compare permission settings of the folder C:\Windows\System32\Tasks with a working computer. Correct permission settings if anything wrong. Specifically, confirm you current account do have permission on this folder.
As it said "object already exists", find the schedules you created before, backup and delete all these schedules in both registry key and folder.
Then test to create a new schedule to see if issue still exists.
Meanwhile what kind of storage device you are using? The issue could occur on specific storage device, so test to enable shadow copy on a local disk to see if that will work.
TechNet Subscriber Support in forum |If you have any feedback on our support, please contact [email protected]
Thank you for you reply.On the local volume,all of these errors will not occur, but the volume in the file server cluser.There is no value in HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Cluster\Tasks. On local volume, everything goes well about the shadow copy, so I do not
think something is wrong about the permission settings of the folder C:\Windows\System32\Tasks.Storage device is a SAN,we use RAID6 and provide the LUNs to the NAS engine, and the make the volume on these LUNs, Is Angthing wrong? Hope for you
reply~~

Prepositioning files on a Server 2008 Cluster

I recently replaced a Server 2003 cluster with a server 2008 cluster. After the migration my prepostioning stopped functioning. The virtual servers are named the same and all the credentials, etc are the same. If I go into one of the preposition definitions and click browse I get a could not access cifs://<servername>. If I point to any of the other servers I am able to browse. Doesn't matter if they are server 2003 or 2008. The clustered servers are domain controllers. The version is 4.1.1c

Could you elaborate on this,as I am having the same issues? Our prepositioning works on the 2003 boxes but not the new 2008 ones.
Where abouts did you turn off the server signing .My serevr team say they have done this,but i would like to check myself.Is there anything else you changed? I can browse the files and select them fine,its just that once the schedule has started,no files get copied.
thanks,
Nick

Windows 2012 Failover Cluster - File server role (vCO)

Hi,
I wonder if anybody can shed some light on a query i have.
A windows 2012 failover cluster will be built in AD domain example.uk. Cluster File server roles will be created and will reside in this domain also.
We also have a requirement to run a cluster file server role in the child domain off secure.example.uk. Is this possible? or do the file server roles and related vCO's have to reside in the same domain as the cluster (CNO).
I know the CNO can be used to create the VCO but could a prestage a VCO in the child domain of secure.example.uk.
Mark

Hi Mark,
By default CNO will create
VCO automatically in default domain computer OU, we generally use the
KISS principle to place the CNO and VCO to the same OU, and as far as I know there no known design document indicate the VCO can be placed in different domain, therefore I suggest you place the CNO and V CO at same OU.
More information:
When Creating a New Resource or Role in Windows Server 2012 R2 Failover Cluster, the Network Name Fails to Come Online or Failed to Create Associated Computer Object in Domain
http://blogs.technet.com/b/askpfeplat/archive/2014/11/17/when-creating-a-new-resource-or-role-in-windows-server-2012-r2-failover-cluster-the-network-name-fails-to-come-online-or-failed-to-create-associated-computer-object-in-domain.aspx
CNO Blog Series: Increasing Awareness around the Cluster Name Object (CNO)
http://blogs.technet.com/b/askcore/archive/2012/09/25/cno-blog-series-increasing-awareness-around-the-cluster-name-object-cno.aspx
How to Create a Cluster in a Restrictive Active Directory Environment
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/clustering/archive/2012/03/30/10289577.aspx
Prestage Cluster Computer Objects in Active Directory Domain Services
https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dn466519.aspx
I’m glad to be of help to you!
Please remember to mark the replies as answers if they help and unmark them if they provide no help. If you have feedback for TechNet Support, contact [email protected]

Cannot Add File Share to (any) File Server Role of a Cluster in Windows Server 2012

Cannot Add File Share to (any) File Server Role of a Cluster in Windows Server 2012...
Get this message in the Operational Log in "FileServices-ServerManager-EventProvider" section of MS-Windows Eventlogs:
Exception: Caught exception Microsoft.Management.Infrastructure.CimException: The xsi:type attribute (MSCluster_Property_Resource_Network_Name) does not identify an existing class.
   at Microsoft.Management.Infrastructure.Internal.Operations.CimSyncEnumeratorBase`1.MoveNext(Boolean discardResultsAndErrors)
   at Microsoft.Management.Infrastructure.Internal.Operations.CimSyncEnumeratorBase`1.MoveNext()
   at Microsoft.FileServer.Management.Plugin.Services.FSCimSession.PerformQuery(String cimNamespace, String queryString)
   at Microsoft.FileServer.Management.Plugin.Services.ClusterEnumerator.BuildNodes(ICimSession session, ClusterRole scopeType, String query, IDictionary`2 groupNameToTypeMap)
   at Microsoft.FileServer.Management.Plugin.Services.ClusterEnumerator.GetClusterClientAccessPointNames(ICimSession session, IDictionary`2 groupNameToTypeMap)
   at Microsoft.FileServer.Management.Plugin.Services.ClusterEnumerator.RetrieveClusterConnections(ComputerName serverName, ClusterMemberTypes memberTypeToQuery)
Thanks for help...(everything else works fine in other type of cluster roles).
Thomas.

This issue also happens in fresh Windows 2012R2 installations, not just upgrades from 2008R2!
I have the issue where I cannot modify any settings on SMB shares. Here is the stacktrace. It appears to be WMI related.
Error: ERROR: Task 'TEST.xxxxxxx.COM-ClusterStorage$-SmbShareUpdate-46bcabf6-1dd4-4a48-a525-5e5d374596c7' has failed: Microsoft.FileServer.Management.Plugin.FSACException: Error occurred while updating an SMB share: The requested operation is not supported.
---> Microsoft.Management.Infrastructure.CimException: The requested operation is not supported.
   at Microsoft.Management.Infrastructure.Internal.Operations.CimSyncEnumeratorBase`1.MoveNext()
   at System.Linq.Enumerable.SingleOrDefault[TSource](IEnumerable`1 source)
   at Microsoft.Management.Infrastructure.CimSession.ModifyInstance(String namespaceName, CimInstance instance, CimOperationOptions options)
   at Microsoft.FileServer.Management.Plugin.Services.FSCimSession.ModifyInstance(ICimInstance instance)
   at Microsoft.FileServer.Management.Plugin.Services.FSCimSession.ModifyInstance(ICimInstance instance, IEnumerable`1 propertiesWithKeys)
   at Microsoft.FileServer.Management.Plugin.Providers.WmiUpdateTaskBase.DoUpdateInstance(ICimSession session, ICimInstance instance)
   at Microsoft.FileServer.Management.Plugin.Providers.WmiUpdateTaskBase.DoWork(Object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
   --- End of inner exception stack trace ---
   at Microsoft.FileServer.Management.Plugin.Providers.WmiUpdateTaskBase.DoWork(Object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
   at System.ComponentModel.BackgroundWorker.WorkerThreadStart(Object argument)

Do we need to format data and log files with 64k cluster size for sql server 2012?

Do we need to format data and log files with 64k cluster size for sql server 2012?
Does this best practice still applies to sql server 2012 & 2014?

Yes. The extent size of SQL Server data files, and the max log block size have not changed with the new versions, so the guidance should remain the same.
Microsoft SQL Server Storage Engine PM

Windows 2008 R2 Multi-Site (geo) Cluster File Server

We need to come up with a new HA file server (user drive data) solution complete with DR. It needs to be 2008 R2, cater for about 25TB of data, and be suitable for 500 users (nothing high end on I/O). I don't want to rely on DFS for any form of resilience
due to its limitations for open files. We have two active-active data centers (a third can be used for file share quorum).
We could entertain:
1)
Site1 - 2 x HP ProLiants with MSA storage, replicating with something like DoubleTake to a third HP Proliant at site 2 for DR.
2)
Site1 - 2 x HP ProLiants with local storage and VSA or HP StoreVirtual array (aka LeftHand), using SAN replication to site 2 where we could have a one or two node config of the same setup.
Ideally I would like all 3/4 nodes in these configurations to be part of the same multi-site cluster to ensure resources like file shares are in sync. With two pieces of storage across this single cluster (either a DoubleTake or SAN replication to local
disks in DR) will this work? How will the cluster/SAN fail over the storage?
We do have VMWare 5.0/1 (not 5.5 yet). We don't have Hyper-V yet either. Any thoughts on the above, and possible alternatives welcome. HA failover RTO we'd like in seconds. DR longer, perhaps 30 mins.
Thanks in advance for any thoughts and guidance.

For automated failover between sites, the storage replication needs to have a way to script the failover so you can have a custom resource that performs the failover at the SAN level before the disks come online.
DoubleTake has GeoCluster which should accomplish this. I'm not sure about how automated Lefthand's solution is for multi-site clusters.
VMware has Site Recovery Manager, though this is really an assisted failover and not really an automatic site failover solution. It's automated so that you can failover between sites at the push of a button, but this would need to be a planned failover.
RTO of seconds might be difficult to accomplish as you need to give the storage replication enough time to reverse direction while giving the MS cluster enough time to bring cluster applications online.
When planning your multi-site cluster, I'd recommend going with 2 nodes on each site and then use the file share witness quorum on your 3rd site. If you only had one node on the remote site, the primary site would never be able to failover to the remote
site without manually overriding the quorum as 1 node isn't enough to gain enough votes for quorum. With 2 nodes on each site and a FSW, each site has the opportunity to gain enough votes to maintain quorum should one of the sites go down.
Hope this helps.
Visit my blog about multi-site clustering

File server on cluster

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for