Take the 2-minute tour ×
Server Fault is a question and answer site for professional system and network administrators. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Scenario:

I have a server that was running low on space. We have an external iscsi SAN that it now has a LUN on and connected to the server as E:\

We are moving the PHOTOS folder from the old location on D:\ to the new E:. That new drive is being shared out as "ARCHIVE".

So:

\\server\shared\photos now becomes \\server\archive\photos

I can easily place a shortcut in the original location saying "DOUBLE CLICK HERE FOR THE PHOTOS", but it isn't ideal.

What I'd like is to be able to have \\server\shared\photos simply point to \\server\archive\photos. So that if someone wants to map a drive to \\server\shared and then browse to the photos folder once in there they will see what is in the \\server\archive\photos location.

Is that possible? I was thinking about SUBST or DFS, but I don't think either of those will do it.

share|improve this question
    
sounds like you want symlinks for Windows :) –  warren Apr 16 '10 at 17:14
    
DFS will do what you want. And it's more maintainable than creating a "hardlink" junction point. Deploying DFS isn't the easiest however, and would require a bit of though. I use if for instances like this all the time however; people never have any idea that the files are scattered across different servers, or different drives on the same server. –  Chris S Apr 18 '10 at 13:31
add comment

2 Answers

up vote 1 down vote accepted

You can use a NTFS mount point (sometimes called "junction point"); it's quite difficult to find documentation about them, but they've been around since Windows 2000.

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/205524/en-us

To mount a drive as a folder instead of giving it a drive letter:

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/307889/en-us

share|improve this answer
add comment

Take a look at Junction by Sysinternals -- NTFS method of creating UNIX-like hard links: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb896768.aspx

share|improve this answer
    
They are closer to hardlinks than symlinks –  Zypher Apr 16 '10 at 17:14
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.