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

My question is simple, We have an web server running windows 2008 with IIS. We map a network drive from our storage facilities to it and host the site that way.

I am wondering if there are likely to be any performance issues doing this? We have bench marked I/O's and are currently happy with the results over the mapped drive. Just wondering if there is anything else I should watch out for.

share|improve this question
up vote 1 down vote accepted

Without meaning to be obtuse, but you've absolutely answered your own question. To my knowledge, there are no real underlying issues doing this - it'd probably be better with a SAN so that you get a proper LUN and therefore drive letter presented to the server, but this should work okay.

The key issue will simply be throughput and if you've tested it and you're happy, then that's great.

There is, however an article here that implies you may be better off using full UNC paths rather than mapped drives.

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.