Gotcha...completely missed that. Well, I learned something new today :)
-Phil From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Chris Muster Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2016 3:32 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [mssms] RE: Package vs App Model - Package Source I think Kim was referring to this sentence from the blog post: Note: Because Data Deduplication internally uses reparse points, and Configuration Manager does not support using a content source folder with files stored on reparse points, therefore using a content source folder located on a volume enabled for Data Deduplication may not work. From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Schwan, Phil Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2016 1:18 PM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: RE: [mssms] RE: Package vs App Model - Package Source Read back through, friend...we're talking about the original content source location, not the Content Library or Distribution Points :) -Phil _________________________________________________________________ Phil Schwan | Technical Architect, Enterprise Windows Services Microsoft VTSP ([email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>) Project Leadership Associates | 2000 Town Center, Suite 1900, Southfield, MI 48075 Lync: 312.756.1626 Mobile: 419.262.5133 www.projectleadership.net<http://www.projectleadership.net/> [linkedin_logo-19x20] <http://www.linkedin.com/in/philschwan> [Twitter-Logo1-20x20] <https://twitter.com/philschwan> [wordpress-logo3] <http://myitforum.com/myitforumwp/author/philschwan> [Description: Description: Description: Arrow email]Lead with Strategy. Leverage Technology. Deliver Results. From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Kim Oppalfens Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2016 1:27 PM To: Schwan, Phil <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: RE: [mssms] RE: Package vs App Model - Package Source *cough* not supported *cough* http://blogs.technet.com/b/configmgrteam/archive/2014/02/18/configuration-manager-distribution-points-and-windows-server-2012-data-deduplication.aspx Sent from Outlook Mail<http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550987> for Windows 10 phone From: Schwan, Phil<mailto:[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, 14 January 2016 2:28 AM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: [mssms] RE: Package vs App Model - Package Source *cough*diskdeduplication*cough* -Phil _________________________________________________________________ Phil Schwan | Technical Architect, Enterprise Windows Services Microsoft VTSP ([email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>) Project Leadership Associates | 2000 Town Center, Suite 1900, Southfield, MI 48075 Lync: 312.756.1626 Mobile: 419.262.5133 www.projectleadership.net<http://www.projectleadership.net/> [linkedin_logo-19x20] <http://www.linkedin.com/in/philschwan> [Twitter-Logo1-20x20] <https://twitter.com/philschwan> [wordpress-logo3] <http://myitforum.com/myitforumwp/author/philschwan> [Description: Description: Description: Arrow email]Lead with Strategy. Leverage Technology. Deliver Results. From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jason Sandys Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2016 5:06 PM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: [mssms] RE: Package vs App Model - Package Source "but others have brought up that then the package server will need double the space" Disk space is *cheap* particularly for source locations which should be on the cheapest disk you have. Problems because you updated the source files not understanding the link between the two are just not worth it. J From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Marable, Mike Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2016 12:55 PM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: [mssms] RE: Package vs App Model - Package Source Same here. Every package and application needs its own unique source. Nothing is shared. Mike From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Daniel Ratliff Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2016 1:18 PM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: [mssms] RE: Package vs App Model - Package Source We generally use the rule that all source content needs to be separate. Daniel Ratliff From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Robert Spinelli Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2016 12:59 PM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: [mssms] Package vs App Model - Package Source Trying to see what others do for this, example below: If you have WinZip that is setup as a legacy package and also as an application that both use the same install (e.g. WInzip.MSI) do you let the legacy package and application use the same source or do you split it? Example same source: Legacy package: \\fileserver.contoso.com\packagesource\winzip\r1<file:///\\fileserver.contoso.com\packagesource\winzip\r1> Application : \\fileserver.contoso.com\packagesource\winzip\r1<file:///\\fileserver.contoso.com\packagesource\winzip\r1> I have always split it and used 2 separate sources but others have brought up that then the package server will need double the space. It's not a problem of space for the DP's because of single instance store. My feeling is someone is going to do something like put a file in the package source (\\fileserver.contoso.com\packagesource\winzip\r1<file:///\\fileserver.contoso.com\packagesource\winzip\r1>) for the WinZip legacy package, update the content and now hash issues are going to occur for the WinZip Application. Thanks Rob The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain CONFIDENTIAL material. If you receive this material/information in error, please contact the sender and delete or destroy the material/information. ********************************************************** Electronic Mail is not secure, may not be read every day, and should not be used for urgent or sensitive issues
