Microsoft's official enterprise support blog for AD DS and more
Hi, Ned again. Today I’d like to talk about troubleshooting DFS Replication (i.e. the DFSR service included with Windows Server 2003 R2, not to be confused with the File Replication Service). Specifically, I’ll cover the most common causes of slow replication and what you can do about them.
Update: Make sure you also read this much newer post to avoid common mistakes that can lead to instability or poor performance: http://blogs.technet.com/b/askds/archive/2010/11/01/common-dfsr-configuration-mistakes-and-oversights.aspx
Let’s start with ‘slow’. This loaded word is largely a matter of perception. Maybe DFSR was once much faster and you see it degrading over time? Has it always been too slow for your needs and now you’ve just gotten fed up? What will you consider acceptable performance so that you know when you’ve gotten it fixed? There are some methods that we can use to quantify what ‘slow’ really means:
· DFSMGMT.MSC Health Reports
We can use the DFSR Diagnostic Reports to see how big the backlog is between servers and if that indicates a slowdown problem:
The generated report will tell you sending and receiving backlogs in an easy to read HTML format.
· DFSRDIAG.EXE BACKLOG command
If you’re into the command-line you can use the DFSRDIAG BACKLOG command (with options) to see how behind servers are in replication and if that indicates a slow down. Dfsrdiag is installed when you install DFSR on the server. So for example:
dfsrdiag backlog /rgname:slowrepro /rfname:slowrf /sendingmember:2003srv13 /receivingmember:2003srv17
Member <2003srv17> Backlog File Count: 10 Backlog File Names (first 10 files) 1. File name: UPDINI.EXE 2. File name: win2000 3. File name: setupcl.exe 4. File name: sysprep.exe 5. File name: sysprep.inf.pro 6. File name: sysprep.inf.srv 7. File name: sysprep_pro.cmd 8. File name: sysprep_srv.cmd 9. File name: win2003 10. File name: setupcl.exe
This command shows up to the first 100 file names, and also gives an accurate snapshot count. Running it a few times over an hour and give you some basic trends. Note that hotfix 925377 resolves an error you may receive when continuously querying backlog, although you may want to consider installing the more current DFSR.EXE hotfix which is 931685. Review the recommended hotfix list for more information.
· Performance Monitor with DFSR Counters enabled
DFSR updates the Perfmon counters on your R2 servers to include three new objects:
Using these allows you to see historical and real-time statistics on your replication performance, including things like total files received, staging bytes cleaned up, and file installs retried – all useful in determining what true performance is as opposed to end user perception. Check out the Windows Server 2003 Technical Reference for plenty of detail on Perfmon and visit our sister AskPerf blog.
· DFSRDIAG.EXE PropagationTest and PropagationReport
By running DFSRDIAG.EXE you can create test files then measure their replication times in a very granular way. So for example, here I have three DFSR servers – 2003SRV13, 2003SRV16, and 2003SRV17. I can execute from a CMD line:
dfsrdiag propagationtest /rgname:slowrepro /rfname:slowrf /testfile:canarytest2
(wait a few minutes)
dfsrdiag propagationreport /rgname:slowrepro /rfname:slowrf /testfile:canarytest2 /reportfile:c:\proprep.xml
PROCESSING MEMBER 2003SRV17 [1 OUT OF 3] PROCESSING MEMBER 2003SRV13 [2 OUT OF 3] PROCESSING MEMBER 2003SRV16 [3 OUT OF 3]
Total number of members : 3 Number of disabled members : 0 Number of unsubscribed members : 0 Number of invalid AD member objects: 0 Test file access failures : 0 WMI access failures : 0 ID record search failures : 0 Test file mismatches : 0 Members with valid test file : 3
This generates an XML file with time stamps for when a file was created on 2003SRV13 and when it was replicated to the other two nodes.
The time stamp is in FILETIME format which we can convert with the W32tm tool included in Windows Server 2003.
<MemberName>2003srv17</MemberName> <CreateTime>128357420888794190</CreateTime> <UpdateTime>128357422068608450</UpdateTime>
w32tm /ntte 128357420888794190 148561 19:54:48.8794190 - 10/1/2007 3:54:48 PM (local time)
C:\>w32tm /ntte 128357422068608450 148561 19:56:46.8608450 - 10/1/2007 3:56:46 PM (local time)
So around two minutes later our file showed up. Incidentally, this is something you can do in the GUI on Windows Server 2008 and it even gives you the replication time in a format designed for human beings!
Based on the above steps, let’s say we’re seeing a significant backlog and slower than expected replication of files. Let’s break down the most common causes as seen by MS Support:
1. Missing Windows Server 2003 Network QFE Hotfixes or Service Pack 2
Over the course of its lifetime there have been a few hotfixes for Windows Server 2003 that resolved intermittent issues with network connectivity. Those issues generally affected RPC and led to DFSR (which relies heavily on RPC) to be a casualty. To close these loops you can install KB938751 and KB922972 if you are on Service Pack 1 or 2. I highly recommend (in fact, I pretty much demand!) that you also install KB950224 to prevent a variety of DFSR issues - in fact, this hotfix should be on every Win2003 computer in your company.
2. Missing DFSR Service’s latest binary
The most recent version of DFSR.EXE always contains updates that not only fix bugs but also generally improve replication performance. We now have a KB article that we are keeping up to date with the latest files we recommend running for DFSR:
KB 958802 - List of currently available hotfixes for Distributed File System (DFS) technologies in Windows Server 2003 R2KB 968429 - List of currently available hotfixes for Distributed File System (DFS) technologies in Windows Server 2008 and in Windows Server 2008 R2
3. Out-of-date Network Card and Storage drivers
You would never run Windows Server 2003 with no Service Packs and no security updates, right? So why run it without updated NIC and storage drivers? A large number of performance issues can be resolved by making sure that you keep your drivers current. Trust me when I say that vendors don’t release new binaries at heavy cost to themselves unless there’s a reason for them. Check your vendor web pages at least once a quarter and test test test.
Important note: If you are in the middle of an initial sync, you should not be rebooting your server! All of the above fixes will require reboots. Wait it out, or assume the risk that you may need to run through initial sync again.
4. DFSR Staging directory is too small for the amount of data being modified
DFSR lives and dies by its inbound/outbound Staging directory (stored under <your replicated folder>\dfsrprivate\staging in R2). By default, it has a 4GB elastic quota set that controls the size of files stored there for further replication. Why elastic? Because experience with FRS showed us having a hard-limit quota that prevented replication was A Bad Idea™.
Why is this quota so important? Because if Staging is below quota - 90% by default - it will replicate at the maximum rate of 9 files (5 outbound, 4 inbound) for the entire server. If the staging quota of a replicated folder is exceeded then depending on the number of files currently being replicated for that replicated folder, DFSR may end up slowing replication for the entire server until the staging quota of the replicated folder drops below the low water mark, which is computed by multiplying the staging quota by the low water mark in percent (default is 60%).If the staging quota of a replicated folder is exceeded and the current number of inbound replicated files in progress for that replicated folder exceeds 3 (15 in Win2008) then one task is used by staging cleanup and the three (15 in Win2008) remaining tasks are waiting for staging cleanup to complete. Since there is a maximum of four (15 in Win2008) concurrent tasks, no further inbound replication can take place for the entire system.If the staging quota of a replicated folder is exceeded and the current number of outbound replicated files in progress for that replicated folder exceeds 5 (16 in Win2008) then the RPC server cannot serve anymore RPC requests, the maximum number of RPC requests being processed at the same time being five (16 in Win2008) and all five (16 in Win2008) requests waiting for staging cleanup to complete.You will see DFS replication 4202, 4204, 4206 and 4208 events about this activity and if happens often (multiple times per day) your quota is too small. See the section Optimize the staging folder quota and replication throughput in the Designing Distributed File Systems guidelines for tuning this correctly. You can change the quota using the DFSR Management MMC (dfsmgmt.msc). Select Replication in the left pane, then the Memberships tab in the right pane. Double-click a replicated folder and select the Advanced tab to view or change the Quota (in megabytes) setting. Your event will look like:
Event Type: Warning Event Source: DFSR Event Category: None Event ID: 4202 Date: 10/1/2007 Time: 10:51:59 PM User: N/A Computer: 2003SRV17 Description: The DFS Replication service has detected that the staging space in use for the replicated folder at local path D:\Data\General is above the high watermark. The service will attempt to delete the oldest staging files. Performance may be affected.
Additional Information: Staging Folder: D:\Data\General\DfsrPrivate\Staging\ContentSet{9430D589-0BE2-400C-B39B-D0F2B6CC972E} -{A84AAD19-3BE2-4932-B438-D770B54B8216} Configured Size: 4096 MB Space in Use: 3691 MB High Watermark: 90%
Low Watermark: 60%
Replicated Folder Name: general Replicated Folder ID: 9430D589-0BE2-400C-B39B-D0F2B6CC972E Replication Group Name: General Replication Group ID: 0FC153F9-CC91-47D0-94AD-65AA0FB6AB3D Member ID: A84AAD19-3BE2-4932-B438-D770B54B8216
5. Bandwidth Throttling or Schedule windows are too aggressive
If your replication schedule on the Replication Group or the Connections is set to not replicate from 9-5, you can bet replication will appear slow! If you’ve artificially throttled the bandwidth to 16Kbps on a T3 line things will get pokey. You would be surprised at the number of cases we’ve gotten here where one administrator called about slow replication and it turned out that one of his colleagues had made this change and not told him. You can view and adjust these in DFSMGMT.MSC.
You can also use the Dfsradmin.exe tool to export the schedule to a text file from the command-line. Like Dfsrdiag.exe, Dfsradmin is installed when you install DFSR on a server.
Dfsradmin rg export sched /rgname:testrg /file:rgschedule.txt
You can also export the connection-specific schedules:
Dfsradmin conn export sched /rgname:testrg /sendmem:fabrikam\2003srv16 /recvmem:fabrikam\2003srv17 /file:connschedule.txt
The output is concise but can be un-intuitive. Each row represents a day of the week. Each column represents an hour in the day. A hex value (0-F) represents the bandwidth usage for each 15 min. interval in an hour. F =Full, E=256M, D=128M, C=64M, B=32M, A=16M, 9=8M, 8=4M, 7=2M, 6=1M, 5=512K, 4=256K, 3=128K, 2=64K, 1=16K, 0=No replication. The values are either in megabits per second (M) or kilobits per second (K).
And a bit more about throttling - DFS Replication does not perform bandwidth sensing. You can configure DFS Replication to use a limited amount of bandwidth on a per-connection basis, and DFS Replication can saturate the link for short periods of time. Also, the bandwidth throttling is not perfectly accurate though it maybe “close enough.” This is because we are trying to throttle bandwidth by throttling our RPC calls. Since DFSR is as high as you can get in the network stack, we are at the mercy of various buffers in lower levels of the stack, including RPC. The net result is that if one analyzes the raw network traffic, it will tend to be extremely ‘bursty’.
6. Large amounts of sharing violations
Sharing violations are a fact of life in a distributed network - users open files and gain exclusive WRITE locks in order to modify their data. Periodically those changes are written within NTFS by the application and the USN Change Journal is updated. DFSR Monitors that journal and will attempt to replicate the file, only to find that it cannot because the file is still open. This is a good thing – we wouldn’t want to replicate a file that’s still being modified, naturally.
With enough sharing violations though, DFSR can start spending more time retrying locked files than it does replicating unlocked ones, to the detriment of performance. If you see a considerable amount of DFS Replication event log entries for 4302 and 4304 like below, you may want to start examining how files are being used.
Event ID: 4302 Source DFSR Type Warning Description The DFS Replication service has been repeatedly prevented from replicating a file due to consistent sharing violations encountered on the file. A local sharing violation occurs when the service fails to receive an updated file because the local file is currently in use.
Additional Information: File Path: <drive letter path to folder\subfolder> Replicated Folder Root: <drive letter path to folder> File ID: {<guid>}-v<version> Replicated Folder Name: <folder> Replicated Folder ID: <guid2> Replication Group Name: <dfs path to folder> Replication Group ID: <guid3> Member ID: <guid4>
Many applications can create a large number of spurious sharing violations, because they create temporary files that shouldn’t be replicated. If they have a predictable extension, you can prevent DFSR from trying to replicate them by setting and exception in DFSMGMT.MSC. The default file filter excludes file extensions ~*, *.bak, and *.tmp, so for example the Microsoft Office temporary files (~*) are excluded by default.
Some applications will allow you to specify an alternate location for temporary and working files, or will simply follow the working path as specified in their shortcuts. But sometimes, this type of behavior may be unavoidable, and you will be forced to live with it or stop storing that type of data in a DFSR-replicated location. This is why our recommendation is that DFSR be used to store primarily static data, and not highly dynamic files like Roaming Profiles, Redirected Folders, Home Directories, and the like. This also helps with conflict resolution scenarios where the same or multiple users update files on two servers in between replication, and one set of changes is lost.
7. RDC has been disabled over a WAN link.
Remote Differential Compression is DFSR’s coolest feature – instead of replicating an entire file like FRS did, it replicates only the changed portions. This means your 20MB spreadsheet that had one row modified might only replicate a few KB over the wire. If you disable RDC though, changing any portion of a files data will cause the entire file to replicate, and if the connection is bandwidth-constrained this can lead to much slower performance. You can set this in DFSMGMT.MSC.
As a side note, in an extremely high bandwidth (Gigabit+) scenario where files are changed significantly, it may actually be faster to turn RDC off. Computing RDC signatures and staging that data is computationally expensive, and the CPU time needed to calculate everything may actually be slower than just moving the whole file in that scenario. You really need to test in your environment to see what works for you, using the PerfMon objects and counters included for DFSR.
8. Incompatible Anti-Virus software or other file system filter drivers
It’s a problem that goes back to FRS and Windows 2000 in 1999 – some anti-virus applications were simply not written with the concept of file replication in mind. If an AV product uses its own alternate data streams to store ‘this file is scanned and safe’ information, for example, it can cause that file to replicate out even though to an end-user it is completely unchanged. AV software may also quarantine or reanimate files so that older versions reappear and replicate out. Older open-file Backup solutions that don’t use VSS-compliant methods also have filter drivers that can cause this. When you have a few hundred thousand files doing this, replication can definitely slow down!
You can use Auditing to see if the originating change is coming from the SYSTEM account and not an end user. Be careful here – auditing can be expensive for performance. Also make sure that you are looking at the original change, not the downstream replication change result (which will always come from SYSTEM, since that’s the account running the DFSR service).
There are only a couple things you can do about this if you find that your AV/Backup software filter drivers are at fault:
9. File Server Resource Manager (FSRM) configured with quotas/screens that block replication.
So insidious! FSRM is another component that shipped with R2 that can be used to block file types from being copied to a server, or limit the quantity of files. It has no real tie-in to DFSR though, so it’s possible to configure DFSR to replicate all files and FSRM to prevent certain files from being replicated in. Since DFSR keeps retrying, it can lead to backlogs and situations where too much time is spent retrying backlogged files that can never move and slowing up files that could move as a consequence.
When this is happening, debug logs (%systemroot%\debug\dfsr*.*) will show entries like:
20070605 09:33:36.440 5456 MEET 1243 <Meet::Install> -> WAIT Error processing update. updateName:teenagersfrommars.mp3 uid:{3806F08C-5D57-41E9-85FF-99924DD0438F}-v333459 gvsn:{3806F08C-5D57-41E9-85FF-99924DD0438F}-v333459 connId:{6040D1AC-184D-49DF-8464-35F43218DB78} csName:Users csId:{C86E5BCE-7EBF-4F89-8D1D-387EDAE33002} code:5 Error: + [Error:5(0x5) <Meet::InstallRename> meet.cpp:2244 5456 W66 Access is denied.]
Here we can see that teenagersfrommars.mp3 is supposed to be replicated in, but it failed with an Access Denied. If we run the following from CMD on that server:
filescrn.exe screen list
We see that…
File screens on machine 2003SRV17:
File Screen Path: C:\sharedrf Source Template: Block Audio and Video Files (Matches template) File Groups: Audio and Video Files (Block) Notifications: E-mail, Event Log
… someone has configured FSRM using the default Audio/Video template which blocks MP3 files and it happens to be against our c:\sharedrf folder we are replicating. To fix this we can do one or more of the following:
10. Un-staged or improperly pre-staged data leading to slow initial replication.
Wake up, this is the last one!
Sometimes replication is only slow in the initial sync phase. This can have a number of causes:
Here are the recommendations for pre-staging data that will give you the best bang for your buck, so that initial sync flies by and replication can start doing its real day-to-day job:
(Make sure you have latest DFSR.EXE installed on all nodes before starting!)
I prefer NTBACKUP because it also compresses the data and is less synchronous than XCOPY or ROBOCOPY [Ned - see above]. Some people ask ‘why should I pre-stage, shouldn’t DFSR just take care of all this for me?’. The answer is yes and no: DFSR can handle this, but when you add in all the overhead of effectively every file being ‘modified’ in the database (they are new files as far as DFSR is concerned), a huge volume of data may lead to slow initial replication times. If you take all the heavy lifting out and let DFSR just maintain, things may go far faster for you.
As always, we welcome your comments and questions,
- Ned Pyle
So, from a Best Practice Perspective, if you had to choose between keeping the staging directories in their default location or moving them to a new location (since each will need its own staging directory after all), which one would you recommend? Thanks
My recommendation would just be based on the environment - if you need more space, definitely move it to another drive. If not, don't.
We always want you to allocate as much staging space is possible, so if that means having to move it - go for it.
I'm currently replacing branch office file servers and at the same time starting to use DFS-R for getting data back to a central site. Historically we've used Roboocopy to move data from the old server to the new server (security and all) because of the /mir capability. That works nicely because you can re-sync prior to the swap out, very quickly. BTW, we're going to Server 2008.
I came across this post that says that Robocopy has a bug that causes you not to be able to copy security. I'm going to open a ticket with MS, but thought I would post here with my 2 cents. You recommend using xcopy... Robocopy is now built in (finally) to the OS in Vista and 2008. I just type xcopy /? at a cmd prompt and what appear... "NOTE: Xcopy is now deprecated, please use Robocopy."
Sounds like someone needs to fix the bug in Robocopy.
Hi shannontuten,
It's not that robocopy completely fails to copy security, it's that it sets the inheritance bit in such a way that the MD-5 checksum of the file changes. So while you have security working fine, apps that compare checksums will think the files are different.
Feel free to press for the fix in Robocopy if you have a Premier contract though (do not bother if you are calling in a credit card case, those cannot be escalated to bugs). The more contracted customers that call in on this issue, the more likely we are to cross the bar for a fix. I have also started this dicussion again internally to see if we can get more traction again against 2008 and Win7.
- Ned
We do indeed have a premier contract so I figure it is worth a quick low priority web ticket to let Microsoft know that it affects customers.
I tried using Robocopy and it works fine, the only bad thing is it spams the log with conflict file messages (for every file).
For migrating file servers, it's hard to beat robocopy with a /mir command so that you sync the bulk of the data prior to a switch out and then run it one more time once you take access away. Xcopy just doesn't fit the bill for that type of operation.
Thanks for the great article and response. DFS-R is a quite impressive technology.
Hi
1) IS it possible to View files in replication queue or being replicated ?? Any free tools on the market?
2) A deleted folder in the DFSPrivate\ConflictAndDeleted folder, is it possible to know who originally deleted it in the share.
3) Is there a software or built in tool to know the history of use of a shared folder/File,
Ex:
User Action Path/File Time/date
user_x modified file_x @ time
user_z moved file_w @ time
user_j Deleted file_w @ time
Reead.
Hi,
Answering these in turn:
1) It is possible to see which files have just been replicated, but there's no way to easily tell which files are in the middle of being replicated except by examining the DFSR debug logs.
To see files as they replicate:
1. Create the following registry *key* (not value):
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\Dfsr\Parameters\Enable
Audit
2. Enable Object Access Auditing for these servers (via local or domain-based group
policy) for SUCESS.
3. Refresh policy with GPUPDATE /FORCE (there should be no need to restart DFSR or
the servers)
4. Replicate a new file from upstream to downstream partner.
5. In Event Viewer | Security Events on the upstream partner, you will see:
----------------------------------------------
Event Type: Success Audit
Event Source: DFSR
Event Category: (3)
Event ID: 7006
Date: 2/16/2006
Time: 10:33:50 AM
User: NT AUTHORITY\SYSTEM
Computer: M3
Description:
The DFS Replication service sent an update for the following file:
Additional Information:
Replicated Folder Root: C:\Sales
Replicated Folder Name: Sales
Replicated Folder ID: 3B38DDC2-FFBF-428C-9853-71D2D2D65351
File Name: test.txt
File ID: {B4738E50-CED1-4DA0-94CF-0E21345F98F6}-v2328331
File Parent ID: {3B38DDC2-FFBF-428C-9853-71D2D2D65351}-v1
Partner name: M1.contoso.com
Event ID: 7002
The DFS Replication service served the following file:
6. In Event Viewer | Security Events on the downstream partner, you will see:
Event ID: 7004
Computer: M1
The DFS Replication service received the following file:
Partner name: M3.contoso.com
So by monitoring the security event log for 7002, 7004, 7006 events, you can get a
picture of what's being replicated.
2) It is possible to know who did what with Object Access Auditing. This is covered (at the end) of http://blogs.technet.com/askds/archive/2007/09/04/where-s-my-file-root-cause-analysis-of-frs-and-dfsr-data-deletion.aspx.
3) See above.
Let me know if you have further questions on this,
Ned
If I setup an initial backup type replication in which I select my branch office as authoritative and then run a health report should I expect to see a huge amount of backlogged sending transactions from the backup server (not branch server)? That scares me that the data on the backup server is older and thus the reason I want my branch server to be authoritative. These servers are both running 2008.
I'm gun shy here because we had some sort of event on the central backup server last week that seemed to cause a HUGE amount of sending transactions from our central server back to the branch servers. It seemed to affect some servers that were still in iniital replication. It is almost as if they forgot that the branch server was authoritative. We have since verified that indeed some old files made their way back to the branch office servers. No one has access to the central backup server, no mass changes were made, no ACL changes, etc. The only thing on the box is FCS agent and Veritas NetBackup.
Don't know if it is related, but we can't even stop the dfsr service without it timing out and terminating the process. This has the unfortunate side effect of causing a DB recheck that takes about an hour to run. I'm double and triple checked limits and such and feel we are well below them. We are replicating 33 servers (each with an inbound and outbound connection, so 66 connections) to this one 64 bit Windows 2008 server. The branch servers are 32 bit. There is approximately 5.5 Million files, with very little change rate. The jet database is 2.1 GB, which from reading some post on here doesn't seem all that large.
Any insight would be appreciated. I'm starting to get nervous.
Please open a case with us in support, your issues will require much deeper analysis/data collection than this blog is capable of handling.
I'm starting one, I was just curious if on an initial replication I should see backlogged transactions from the nonauthoritative member?
I accidentally starting spewing too much into the post, sorry.
No worries. I'd expect to see:
1. Backlogged *receiving* transactions
2. Backlogged sending transactions if there were preexisting files and they had been staged incorrectly or modified in some manner prior to initial sync.
Excellent, thank you. These were robocopied with a /copyall so yes they were modified. We learned our lesson with Robocopy a little too late for this migration project.
Getting all my facts together now to call support.
Thanks again.
I thought I would pass along something that occurred to me a little to late to help my situation very much.
Branch office to central server collection group. I robocopied the data with /copyall and thus inadvertantly changed all the files. You can still use the files to stage, but it will spam your logs with conflict messages and fill up your dfsprivate with conflict files.
Instead of pointing your replication group to those files, as prestaged files, simply copy your data to the same volume but do not point to them in your replication group (assuming you have enough space). Doing it this way, dfsr will still use those files to as seeds to populate the replication group (and thus still not copy all the data acros) but will not spam your log or dfsprivate area.
I believe this approach assumes you have enterprise on one end or the other so you get that nice cross file whatchamacallit thing goin' on.
Above listed the most common causes for replication problems. Regarding #6, I have a situation where I one of the servers is no longer receiving updates and the debug.log has a large number of the following entires:
0080730 11:20:58.135 520 MEET 4279 Meet::CheckInSync -> WAIT Related record not in sync with file system. relatedRecordUid:{1F1D1518-7BDD-49B2-BD6D-99E8306F497B}-v67 updateName:wmsfdwn4.pbd uid:{1F1D1518-7BDD-49B2-BD6D-99E8306F497B}-v67 gvsn:{1F1D1518-7BDD-49B2-BD6D-99E8306F497B}-v169616 connId:{E28E47C2-F919-4122-92C8-567F79009683} csName:PROGS csId:{A2AF821E-A258-4E83-BD5D-B2A82519A1E3}
20080730 11:20:58.135 520 MEET 1190 Meet::Install Retries:53 updateName:wmsfdwn2.pbd uid:{1F1D1518-7BDD-49B2-BD6D-99E8306F497B}-v65 gvsn:{1F1D1518-7BDD-49B2-BD6D-99E8306F497B}-v169614 connId:{E28E47C2-F919-4122-92C8-567F79009683} csName:PROGS
20080730 11:20:58.135 520 MEET 4279 Meet::CheckInSync -> WAIT Related record not in sync with file system. relatedRecordUid:{1F1D1518-7BDD-49B2-BD6D-99E8306F497B}-v65 updateName:wmsfdwn2.pbd uid:{1F1D1518-7BDD-49B2-BD6D-99E8306F497B}-v65 gvsn:{1F1D1518-7BDD-49B2-BD6D-99E8306F497B}-v169614 connId:{E28E47C2-F919-4122-92C8-567F79009683} csName:PROGS csId:{A2AF821E-A258-4E83-BD5D-B2A82519A1E3}
20080730 11:20:58.151 2024 MEET 1190 Meet::Install Retries:53 updateName:wmsf_obj.pbd uid:{1F1D1518-7BDD-49B2-BD6D-99E8306F497B}-v70 gvsn:{1F1D1518-7BDD-49B2-BD6D-99E8306F497B}-v169619 connId:{E28E47C2-F919-4122-92C8-567F79009683} csName:PROGS
20080730 11:20:58.151 2024 MEET 4279 Meet::CheckInSync -> WAIT Related record not in sync with file system. relatedRecordUid:{1F1D1518-7BDD-49B2-BD6D-99E8306F497B}-v70 updateName:wmsf_obj.pbd uid:{1F1D1518-7BDD-49B2-BD6D-99E8306F497B}-v70 gvsn:{1F1D1518-7BDD-49B2-BD6D-99E8306F497B}-v169619 connId:{E28E47C2-F919-4122-92C8-567F79009683} csName:PROGS csId:{A2AF821E-A258-4E83-BD5D-B2A82519A1E3}
20080730 11:20:58.151 2024 MEET 1190 Meet::Install Retries:53 updateName:wmsf_dwn.pbd uid:{1F1D1518-7BDD-49B2-BD6D-99E8306F497B}-v69 gvsn:{1F1D1518-7BDD-49B2-BD6D-99E8306F497B}-v169618 connId:{E28E47C2-F919-4122-92C8-567F79009683} csName:PROGS
20080730 11:20:58.151 2024 MEET 4279 Meet::CheckInSync -> WAIT Related record not in sync with file system. relatedRecordUid:{1F1D1518-7BDD-49B2-BD6D-99E8306F497B}-v69 updateName:wmsf_dwn.pbd uid:{1F1D1518-7BDD-49B2-BD6D-99E8306F497B}-v69 gvsn:{1F1D1518-7BDD-49B2-BD6D-99E8306F497B}-v169618 connId:{E28E47C2-F919-4122-92C8-567F79009683} csName:PROGS csId:{A2AF821E-A258-4E83-BD5D-B2A82519A1E3}
20080730 11:20:58.151 2024 MEET 1190 Meet::Install Retries:53 updateName:wms_main.pbd uid:{1F1D1518-7BDD-49B2-BD6D-99E8306F497B}-v74 gvsn:{1F1D1518-7BDD-49B2-BD6D-99E8306F497B}-v169623 connId:{E28E47C2-F919-4122-92C8-567F79009683} csName:PROGS
20080730 11:20:58.151 2024 MEET 4279 Meet::CheckInSync -> WAIT Related record not in sync with file system. relatedRecordUid:{1F1D1518-7BDD-49B2-BD6D-99E8306F497B}-v74 updateName:wms_main.pbd uid:{1F1D1518-7BDD-49B2-BD6D-99E8306F497B}-v74 gvsn:{1F1D1518-7BDD-49B2-BD6D-99E8306F497B}-v169623 connId:{E28E47C2-F919-4122-92C8-567F79009683} csName:PROGS csId:{A2AF821E-A258-4E83-BD5D-B2A82519A1E3}
20080730 11:20:58.151 2024 MEET 1190 Meet::Install Retries:53 updateName:wmsrptap.pbd uid:{1F1D1518-7BDD-49B2-BD6D-99E8306F497B}-v72 gvsn:{1F1D1518-7BDD-49B2-BD6D-99E8306F497B}-v169621 connId:{E28E47C2-F919-4122-92C8-567F79009683} csName:PROGS
20080730 11:20:58.151 2024 MEET 4279 Meet::CheckInSync -> WAIT Related record not in sync with file system. relatedRecordUid:{1F1D1518-7BDD-49B2-BD6D-99E8306F497B}-v72 updateName:wmsrptap.pbd uid:{1F1D1518-7BDD-49B2-BD6D-99E8306F497B}-v72 gvsn:{1F1D1518-7BDD-49B2-BD6D-99E8306F497B}-v169621 connId:{E28E47C2-F919-4122-92C8-567F79009683} csName:PROGS csId:{A2AF821E-A258-4E83-BD5D-B2A82519A1E3}
20080730 11:20:58.166 1228 MEET 1190 Meet::Install Retries:53 updateName:wmsdwsrv.pbd uid:{1F1D1518-7BDD-49B2-BD6D-99E8306F497B}-v63 gvsn:{1F1D1518-7BDD-49B2-BD6D-99E8306F497B}-v169612 connId:{E28E47C2-F919-4122-92C8-567F79009683} csName:PROGS
20080730 11:20:58.166 1228 MEET 4279 Meet::CheckInSync -> WAIT Related record not in sync with file system. relatedRecordUid:{1F1D1518-7BDD-49B2-BD6D-99E8306F497B}-v63 updateName:wmsdwsrv.pbd uid:{1F1D1518-7BDD-49B2-BD6D-99E8306F497B}-v63 gvsn:{1F1D1518-7BDD-49B2-BD6D-99E8306F497B}-v169612 connId:{E28E47C2-F919-4122-92C8-567F79009683} csName:PROGS csId:{A2AF821E-A258-4E83-BD5D-B2A82519A1E3}
Does this mean there is a sharing violation that may be preventing replication? I checked the event log and I am only seeing one Event ID 4302. Thanks for your help!
Hi Mkielman,
Sort of. We've seen that issue with various anti-virus products running on servers that have DFSR. They were gaining handles/intercepting data, leading to this sort of behavior.
You can try:
1. Turning off the real-time scanning of your anti-virus software on that server temporarily to see if the problem stops.
2. If not, we recommend *temporarily* removing the anti-virus software, as some do not completely stop scanning and none ever dynamically unload their kernel-mode filter drivers.
3. If still seeing the issue, ping me back and here and we can noodle some more. It might require that you open a case in order to ship us more data.