Yes, that has always been the case My point was to try and find out if there was a technical barrier to this or whether it was a testing / scenario issue While a BC solution works well in a CM environment I do see a reason for some offices to have a HC solution which caches not only CM content but also BAU data
From: [email protected] To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [mssms] Branch Cache Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 09:26:37 +0200 Interesting. Was that the case for CM07 to?I never considered using hosted, so I never checked that. From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jason Sandys Sent: Donnerstag, 26. September 2013 03:37 To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [mssms] Branch Cache ConfigMgr does not support hosted cache so although the discussion is technically valid, it’s moot for ConfigMgr. J From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Roland Janus Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2013 5:59 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [mssms] Branch Cache Then it might be as well a DP, it is basically a question of disk space.And you probably need a lot of that anyway or clients don’t have content. -R From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jason Wallace Sent: Mittwoch, 25. September 2013 22:01 To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [mssms] Branch Cache Yes, that's kind of my thinking but in a branch office they might want to have file services and intranet data cached as well. HC might mean that this becomes a multi-purpose serverFrom: [email protected] To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [mssms] Branch Cache Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2013 21:52:50 +0200From MS it is either BC or a local DP (or nothing), right. Hosted usually means a server with all the maintenance required coming with it.I don’t see the point of having a server hosting branche cache data if a DP would do a much better job with that and providing more.Of course you may have reasons you can’t do a DP, space being one, but in general, if you want to save on a server for a small site, distributed mode is what I would go with. Nothing to maintain, just hoping clients can manage that and there is always one available. The most benefit for BC is when many clients need the same content at the same time and there aren’t many subnets.You still may have an issue if you do that with a 15GB package, we have those.Hopefully the WAN connection can handle that or BITS is configured or QOS handles that. It didn’t here and the site screamed… -Roland From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jason Wallace Sent: Mittwoch, 25. September 2013 08:55 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [mssms] Branch Cache That is great information Roland Here's a quick question. I know that the ConfigMgr support docs say BC only. My guess is that this was stated purely on the basis that in a pure CM environment it would be more desirable to have a DP of some sort. That said I don't see anything which precludes the use of HC mode in a CM environment. Is that your tale too? On 24 Sep 2013, at 23:18, "Roland Janus" <[email protected]> wrote:- the first client calculates the hash, the 2nd client downloads into the cache (the first doesn’t!). The first finally could use the 2nd client (I’ve tested that to death). The third of course here From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Roland Janus Sent: Dienstag, 24. September 2013 23:06 To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [mssms] Branch Cache Usually you would use distributed cache, otherwise you may use a DP anyway…To consider: - Every client in a subnet will download the content again, they don’t share across subnets- It works best if there aren’t many subnets at a location and of course a client only provides content if it downloaded itself and is still available to others- We use site GPOs to enable/disable branchcache on clients. If you can, look into that.- It will always prefer BC over a local DP, it is slower.- I’m not in favor of enabling it like for everyone on large sites, that’s why it is not enabled when there is a local DP (using the GPO)- You might have issues with clients with small disks. Don’t expect too much about. It is not a DP or Nomad or OneSite. Not even close. But for smaller sites: It is free… With 2012 it is supposed to be better, but with 2008:- the first client calculates the hash, the 2nd client downloads into the cache (the first doesn’t!). The first finally could use the 2nd client (I’ve tested that to death).- With every reboot of the server the hash was gone and it started from scratch… Yeah, really. -Roland From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Todd Hemsell Sent: Dienstag, 24. September 2013 22:02 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [mssms] Branch Cache theoretically it would be possible to use a DCM rule to enable and disable branch cache on machines as they went to and left a particular site? What would the affect be of turning it on at a small site then the laptop goes to a larger site? any idea? On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 2:39 PM, Trevor Sullivan <[email protected]> wrote:Right here: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/hh831696.aspx It’s ridiculously easy to get set up. A couple PowerShell commands, and you’re good to go. Cheers,Trevor Sullivan From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Todd Hemsell Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 2:38 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [mssms] Branch Cache I am unable to locate a good doc for branch cache GPO for CM12. Does anyone have a link to a good doc? /Todd This is so clients can share content on the same subnet.
