Migration experts please :-)

I am wanting to transfer our data from our server to our new Server 2008 environment (same domain) and want to retain both the NTFS permissions and shares.

After much research, I have almost fully decided on robocopy to keep the permissions, and then came across this technet thread that suggests simply copying some registry edits to retain the shares and those permissions. However, would it work if the servername was to be different or will I have to re-share all the folders again manually?

Server 2008 File Server Migration Toolkit

(OxYIs post)

Find more posts tagged with

Free for TechExams community: Cybersecurity salary guide

Compare cert salaries and plan your next career move

Button

Comments

mr2nut

Surely one of you wizards have the answer for this?

Turgon

mr2nut wrote: »

Surely one of you wizards have the answer for this?

Someone may have done this and answer you in time. As its a production system no one sensible will put their cock on the block and advise you if they dont know. Have you tested the concept on a reference model of sorts? Every company should have one these days.

Meanwhile keep scouring technet and newsgroups.

SWM

Wizard..me ..no but

Robocopy is great, It will keep all your NTFS permissions, but if the server name changes you will need to reshare on the new server.

AFAIK you are correct with the registry and sharing, in moving drives and partitions before, I have have had to change a D partition into a E partition as an example and all the shares are lost (NTFS retained though). But when I reboot and change the E back to D the shares return, so yes the registry is great !!

But recreating shares is quicker and easier than replicating NTFS permissions on big drives....:)

Goodluck

rwwest7

Recreate the shares, then move the data. Some times people spend more time searching for an easy way to do something then it would actually take to just do it.

RobertKaucher

If your users have network drives mapped or icons that link to [URL="file://\\originalserver\share"]\\originalserver\share[/URL] when you move things to [URL="file://\\newserver\share"]\\newserver\share[/URL] the links will be broken.

If I were you I would consider deploying DFS. See if this might help you:
Distributed File System

Depending on the size of your environment and the amount the data changes it might just add complexity to your environment.

blargoe

If you must fully automate the entire process and are willing to pay a few hundred dollars to do it, ScriptLogic's Secure Copy will do a great job for you.

undomiel

I would also cast a vote for DFS. Robocopy is great though if you decide not to go down that route.

mr2nut

rwwest7 wrote: »

Recreate the shares, then move the data. Some times people spend more time searching for an easy way to do something then it would actually take to just do it.

lol, too true. But then if you do it all the time, it can save loads of hours but I agree on this one. Sod butchering the registry, just mirror the shares by eye then transfer all the data using robocopy right?

mr2nut

blargoe wrote: »

If you must fully automate the entire process and are willing to pay a few hundred dollars to do it, ScriptLogic's Secure Copy will do a great job for you.

I did notice this actually. Have you any experience of it yourself? Is it as easy as simply putting source and destination in, and it will do the share AND NTFS permissions all in one go?

mr2nut

Cheers for the DFS suggestions too. I think for most companies with single domain it's over the top and causes headaches when it doesn't replicate. Think i'll stick with robocopy. Always good to get other peoples opinions though!

rsutton

I did a largeish fileshare move a while back with similar requirements and had good success with Secure Copy. All permissions were intact after the move. Has a nice GUI to work with.

mr2nut

rsutton wrote: »

I did a largeish fileshare move a while back with similar requirements and had good success with Secure Copy. All permissions were intact after the move. Has a nice GUI to work with.

Sounds really good. Might get a trial download!

Does it keep NTFS AND share permissions too, even if you move to a server with a new hostname?

HeroPsycho

mr2nut wrote: »

Sounds really good. Might get a trial download!

Does it keep NTFS AND share permissions too, even if you move to a server with a new hostname?

Is there a reason you're restricting share permissions? It's best practice to grant Everyone full share permissions, and restrict via NTFS permissions.

blargoe

One other thing about Secure Copy is that it can set all the timestamps back to what they were before you copy them, which was important to us because we're going to begin archiving files based on age very soon.

mr2nut

HeroPsycho wrote: »

Is there a reason you're restricting share permissions? It's best practice to grant Everyone full share permissions, and restrict via NTFS permissions.

Straight to the point and something that I didn't know that I should have really. I always associated NTFS permissions with local access but that now rejogs my memory. In that case, i'll stick with robocopy. Cheers everyone!

HeroPsycho

mr2nut wrote: »

Straight to the point and something that I didn't know that I should have really. I always associated NTFS permissions with local access but that now rejogs my memory. In that case, i'll stick with robocopy. Cheers everyone!

The only exception to this is if you literally wanted some people to have access if they're local on the machine, but deny access to the same data over the network to that same group, but others still need access to that data over the network. I don't think I've ever ran into a situation like that. Grant Everyone full control via share permissions, and restrict using NTFS unless you have a very good reason to otherwise.