Server Fault is a question and answer site for system and network administrators. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Most of my file server installs these days seem to involve far too much downtime. The actual server install isn't too bad but migrating the data takes forever now that we have 1TB+ arrays we need to worry about. My typical method is to strip share permissions and use robocopy to copy all of the data over. Rather than wait for all of the data to copy over, I'd prefer to copy the data over the night before, then sync over changes after I strip permissions to the old server. Is there a nice way of doing this on Windows? I've looked into using DFS-R to accomplish this, but I'd prefer something a

share|improve this question
Why not just use run robocopy for the main copy ahead of time,then run it again to copy the changes when you have disabled access? If you use the right command line robocopy will just copy things that have changed. – Zoredache Sep 13 '10 at 20:23
up vote 2 down vote accepted

Couldn't you continue to use Robocopy and use some of the advanced file selection options? So over night you would basically robocopy X:\*.* Y: /M. Then when you want to sync up, do the same thing. This should have the effect of copying all the files with the archive bit, and resetting the bit, then the next time it would copy anything that has it's archive bit set (and reset it again).

share|improve this answer

Would a windows implementation of rsync like deltacopy be what your looking for ?

share|improve this answer
+1, that's how i've done several multi-TB migrations on Linux: run rsync with low priority (perhaps over several days); once it finishes, run it again, and maybe a third time. then stop service, rsync once more and start up replacement. at worst, 10-15 mins of downtime – Javier Sep 13 '10 at 19:20
This is how I've done it with Solaris too. – Iain Sep 14 '10 at 9:16

DFS-R. Works like a charm, without taking the server down. I never expose a server directly to users - all access is always done using DFS shares. actually my setups normally have 1-multiple DFS trees, most only one.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer


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.