Multiple-machine deployment for 10.2 and server directories/config-store

[JoeTosoni]

Hello - Our current Server 10.0 architecture contains two dedicated production VM servers, each having a duplicate copy of the data (file gdbs, mxds, msds)  residing on their 😧 drives. Also, each server has their own server directories and config-store folders residing on the 😧 drives.

Given that we want to have copies of the data on both servers, my question is - for our upgrade to 10.2, is it necessary and optimal to retain this same structure or is it recommended to have only one set of folders (server dir and config-store) on either one GIS Server or a dedicated fault-tolerant file server with UNC paths so that both GIS servers can connect to them?  Thanks!

[MichaelVolz]

I would recommend having only one set of folders (server dir and config-store) on a dedicated fault-tolerant file server with UNC paths so that both GIS servers can connect to them.  You would just register the data store.  This would prevent any sync issues where the data was updated on 1 server but not the other.  My organization has implemented this approach and it works well.  You will get a medium level warning for using UNC paths, but I would just ignore this warning when you are analyzing your mapservices during the publishing process.

[JoeTosoni]

Thanks for your reply. We'll take this into consideration - it would be nice to only have one location of data to prevent any issues and hassle. This then brings up another question on whether or not it would be appropriate to house our data, config files, and directories on our Web Adaptor Server which will reside behind all firewalls on our internal network? The reason being would be to lower costs and resources on a file server.

[MichaelVolz]

How does that setup lower costs, can you please explain?

[JoeTosoni]

We're a state gov't agency and we are charged a hefty amount per Server per month for usage. I guess we could look into just using some "live" storage instead of an actual VM server. However, the real question is if there would be any issues putting everything (data and config folders) on the same server as the web adaptor?