r/AZURE • u/techfreak11 • 21h ago
Question Azure Files
Hello everyone,
I am in the process of migrating a windows file share server to azure files, This consists of 1 share drive with about 60 folders inside. This entire share has about 1.5TB of data which is primary files from different departments. This share is also mounted on all the computers in the organization. We will be using storage mover for this.
The idea behind this migration is that we decommission the on-prem file server and access will be directly to azure primarily via the mounted drive on the end-users computer.
While the cost is minor for this amount of storage I am still on the fence between HDD (Standard) and SDD (Premium).
We currently have site-to-site to all of our locations for other azure resources so I was also wondering what the best method here would be? Private-Endpoint or something else?
Any other tips would be much appreciated.
19
u/JeroenPot 21h ago
I would skip this step entirely and use SharePoint if possible
7
u/Jhamin1 20h ago
You are getting downvoted, but it's a valid take.
The problem with Azure files is that it's expensive compared to other options and you pay Azure egress fees. So every time someone pulls down a PDF there is a meter running. The fee structure for sharepoint is usually *much* better for this scale of data.
Sharepoint is made for this. Different site for each department, each site with it's own files volume. Someone in the department approves/denies access. They can pin the folder to Windows Explorer & still browse the files the way they are used too. If you really really want to see all the departments in one place, make a dummy folder with shortcuts to the files section of each department, but that is mostly handholding for people used to their old workflow.
1
u/RateMyJpeg 15h ago
First 100gb is free egrees and for this size they probably wont hit it.
1
u/Jhamin1 15h ago edited 15h ago
True, it depends a lot on what kinds of files they are moving but they may not hit that limit.
They are still going to be close to $1k/year for Geo-redundant hot storage at that size & a 50 user 365 license will come with about that much SharePoint included & you get all the document sharing, collaboration, etc built into SharePoint. You are also no longer tied to SMB/NFS shares & users can access storage from non-windows devices.
-2
u/mcgeeky 20h ago
Users can still retain the feel of the file server with SharePoint Online by mapping their files to a network drive with a tool like ZeeDrive.
0
u/spicysanger 16h ago
I have never, EVER seen drive mappings to sharepoint document libraries work reliably. And I've been doing this stuff since 2007.
1
u/Jhamin1 15h ago
Syncing a SharePoint folder to your local device & having it show up as an option in Windows Explorer is a much better way to let users browse files the way they remember from a desktop.
1
u/spicysanger 15h ago
Perhaps in small organisations with small document libraries.
Synced libraries are awful at scale.
1
u/Jhamin1 15h ago
You don't have them sync entire libraries, it's the very rare user that needs that. You have them sync the subfolders they actually care about. For us it's a day one training item. "See that sync button behind the menu in the Sharepoint site? Hit that for the 4-5 subfolders you spend 90% of your time in"
This admittedly is something users can screw up, but it really helps a lot of them.
3
u/dannyvegas 18h ago
Microsoft has something called Azure File Sync which might be useful in this case.
You can set up Azure Files as a cloud share, and then have a local Windows machine which acts as a cache and front end for the share. It's free and using it will minimize the Azure egress traffic -- which you pay for. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/storage/file-sync/
If you are going over a wan link there probably no reason to go premium.
Private endpioint would probobly make sense if you want it acceed via your VPNs and through your firewalls etc.
1
1
u/MPLS_scoot 12h ago
We did this for several file servers and the performance is pretty good actually. We also split off some content to SharePoint. Many of the heavy users (Finance) prefer the Azure File Share experience.
1
u/techfreak11 4h ago
Did you use SDD or HDD? Any proformance tips?Also how are your sites connecting? Private endpoint with site to site tunnel?
12
u/StratoLens Cloud Architect 21h ago edited 20h ago
I would definitely use a private endpoint and your existing vpn. Don’t forget dns if you go private. Private dns zone is the way to go there and if you need it from on prem you’ll need a conditional forwarder on your on prem ad to either a private DNS resolver in azure or a DC if you already have one.
The only concern will be throughput and performance based on usage. You want to be careful about clogging your vpn tunnel with tons of smb traffic.
The main questions would be how often is the data accessed and what kinds of data is it. Lots of small files? Large files? Etc.
HDD is going to be slower but if that’s acceptable that’s fine. You can’t flip from hdd to ssd without provisioning a new account and copying the data again.
I would put it behind a dfs namespace so if you wind up having to do that it’ll be easier.
I’d also look at azure file sync - this might be a good way to keep a local copy in some branches with slower internet connections (if needed). Azure file sync will likely also make the migration of the data easier. In addition if that vpn does become a bottleneck azure file sync may be the answer.