I always use the /mir option when doing a migration like that. The reason is I have to do a "big" initial copy and then at least one delta copy. (I usually do the final copy after removing access by changing share perms or removing the share entirely so no further changes are made.) If I don't use the /mir option, users will likely end up with data that is no longer supposed to be present. (This assumes they will continue to have access to the old server while copy job is running.)
It's completely safe despite the warning in the help, at least in this scenario. Unless I'm missing something, the new server will not be accessible to users until you finish the migration, thus there should be no extra data which could get deleted. On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 2:27 PM, Michael Leone <[email protected]> wrote: > I'd like to impose once more for some advice and opinions. I have a Win > 2008 R2 file server; I need to migrate everything (shares and user home > folders) to a Win 2012 R2 Storage Server, and then retire the old server. > Everything is one 1 drive, with 3 main folders (Shares,Users,Scans), total > size in the neighborhood of 2TB. Both have 4 teamed 1G NICs, so a total > bandwidth of 4G. > > I'm thinking of use robocopy. I would make a full copy over the weekend: > > Source=OldFS\F$ > Destination=NewFs\d$ > > RoboCopy <Source> <Destination> /S /E /ZB /COPYALL /R:1 /W:1 /V /NP /NFL > /NDL /LOG+:<LogFile> > > That should get everything, NTFS security and all sub-folders. I thought > about the /MIR option, but I've never used it, and so am just a touch leery > (perhaps illogically). > > The end goal is to: > copy all the files and shares to the new FS; > re-name and re-IP the old FS; > power off the old FS; > re-name and re-IP the new FS to the old name. > > (this way I can power up the old FS, just in case I need it for something > I've missed) > > That *should* make things transparent to the end users. > > (ordinarily, I would think about doing a restore from my backup program > Networker. But this is a remote site, and I believe that doing a local > robocopy will probably be faster than trying to restore 2TB of what is > probably a lot of small user files and folders across a 1G link) > > What have I missed? What would make it better? > > > > -- Charlie Sullivan Sr. Windows Systems Administrator Boston College 197 Foster St. Room 367 Brighton, MA 02135 617-552-4318
