Home Folder Architecture

[-Steve-]

I have ~30,000 users who's home drives we're going to migrate to a central
location? I'm trying to determine how best to layout these folders.

Ideally I would like to simply use \\server\share\%username%, but that would
create a folder with 30,000 folders in it. That seems like it would be hard
to manage, and might not be a good idea.

Other idea's I've had is to do \\server\share\%firstInitial%\%username% but
that makes scripting a little tougher.

Any other ideas?

Steve

 

[SBS Rocker]

Well with 30,000 users I can't see how you can get away from having to
creaate 30,000 user folders. Your first suggestion will work. Just create a
script that edits their profile to point to \\servername\users\%username%

"-Steve-" <nntp@dosomethingwiththis.miisconsultant.com> wrote in message
news:O%233Ab7avHHA.4516@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>I have ~30,000 users who's home drives we're going to migrate to a central
> location? I'm trying to determine how best to layout these folders.
>
> Ideally I would like to simply use \\server\share\%username%, but that
> would
> create a folder with 30,000 folders in it. That seems like it would be
> hard
> to manage, and might not be a good idea.
>
> Other idea's I've had is to do \\server\share\%firstInitial%\%username%
> but
> that makes scripting a little tougher.
>
> Any other ideas?
>
> Steve
>
>
>
>

 

[-Steve-]

I'm not worried about creating 30,000 folders. I'm worried about creating
30,000 folders in one parent folder. When I go to \\server\share there's
going to be 30,000 folders to wade through.


"SBS Rocker" <noreply@NoDomain.com> wrote in message
news:uz$bL%23avHHA.1204@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> Well with 30,000 users I can't see how you can get away from having to
> creaate 30,000 user folders. Your first suggestion will work. Just create
> a script that edits their profile to point to
> \\servername\users\%username%
>
> "-Steve-" <nntp@dosomethingwiththis.miisconsultant.com> wrote in message
> news:O%233Ab7avHHA.4516@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>I have ~30,000 users who's home drives we're going to migrate to a central
>> location? I'm trying to determine how best to layout these folders.
>>
>> Ideally I would like to simply use \\server\share\%username%, but that
>> would
>> create a folder with 30,000 folders in it. That seems like it would be
>> hard
>> to manage, and might not be a good idea.
>>
>> Other idea's I've had is to do \\server\share\%firstInitial%\%username%
>> but
>> that makes scripting a little tougher.
>>
>> Any other ideas?
>>
>> Steve
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>

 

[SBS Rocker]

I'm confused on what exactly you're asking. These are user home folders
correct? So every user will need their own home folder. What's the
difference between

\\server\share\%firstInitial%\%username% and \\server\share\%username%

Either way it is still 30,000 folders.

"-Steve-" <nntp@dosomethingwiththis.miisconsultant.com> wrote in message
news:%23I5FdGbvHHA.4332@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> I'm not worried about creating 30,000 folders. I'm worried about creating
> 30,000 folders in one parent folder. When I go to \\server\share there's
> going to be 30,000 folders to wade through.
>
>
> "SBS Rocker" <noreply@NoDomain.com> wrote in message
> news:uz$bL%23avHHA.1204@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> Well with 30,000 users I can't see how you can get away from having to
>> creaate 30,000 user folders. Your first suggestion will work. Just create
>> a script that edits their profile to point to
>> \\servername\users\%username%
>>
>> "-Steve-" <nntp@dosomethingwiththis.miisconsultant.com> wrote in message
>> news:O%233Ab7avHHA.4516@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>>I have ~30,000 users who's home drives we're going to migrate to a
>>>central
>>> location? I'm trying to determine how best to layout these folders.
>>>
>>> Ideally I would like to simply use \\server\share\%username%, but that
>>> would
>>> create a folder with 30,000 folders in it. That seems like it would be
>>> hard
>>> to manage, and might not be a good idea.
>>>
>>> Other idea's I've had is to do \\server\share\%firstInitial%\%username%
>>> but
>>> that makes scripting a little tougher.
>>>
>>> Any other ideas?
>>>
>>> Steve
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

 

[-Steve-]

Yes but with the firstInitial example:

\\server\share\ has 26 sub-folders
\\server\share\a has ~1500 sub-folders
\\server\share\b has ~1500 sub-folders
\\server\share\q has ~10 sub-folders -)


Should I not be concerend that an admin that navigates to \\server\share
will get back 30,000 folders? I'm assuming explorer would barf at that.


"SBS Rocker" <noreply@NoDomain.com> wrote in message
news:e4N1DSbvHHA.2352@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> I'm confused on what exactly you're asking. These are user home folders
> correct? So every user will need their own home folder. What's the
> difference between
>
> \\server\share\%firstInitial%\%username% and \\server\share\%username%
>
> Either way it is still 30,000 folders.
>
> "-Steve-" <nntp@dosomethingwiththis.miisconsultant.com> wrote in message
> news:%23I5FdGbvHHA.4332@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> I'm not worried about creating 30,000 folders. I'm worried about
>> creating 30,000 folders in one parent folder. When I go to
>> \\server\share there's going to be 30,000 folders to wade through.
>>
>>
>> "SBS Rocker" <noreply@NoDomain.com> wrote in message
>> news:uz$bL%23avHHA.1204@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>> Well with 30,000 users I can't see how you can get away from having to
>>> creaate 30,000 user folders. Your first suggestion will work. Just
>>> create a script that edits their profile to point to
>>> \\servername\users\%username%
>>>
>>> "-Steve-" <nntp@dosomethingwiththis.miisconsultant.com> wrote in message
>>> news:O%233Ab7avHHA.4516@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>>>I have ~30,000 users who's home drives we're going to migrate to a
>>>>central
>>>> location? I'm trying to determine how best to layout these folders.
>>>>
>>>> Ideally I would like to simply use \\server\share\%username%, but that
>>>> would
>>>> create a folder with 30,000 folders in it. That seems like it would be
>>>> hard
>>>> to manage, and might not be a good idea.
>>>>
>>>> Other idea's I've had is to do \\server\share\%firstInitial%\%username%
>>>> but
>>>> that makes scripting a little tougher.
>>>>
>>>> Any other ideas?
>>>>
>>>> Steve
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

 

[SBS Rocker]

OK now I see what you're talking about. I agree about the bark part. It
will mostly likely freeze Explorer. You have quite some cleanup ahead of
you. that said I do now like your first suggestion using first initial. But
I would take it one level higher.

\\server\shareA\%username%
\\server\shareB\%username%


"-Steve-" <nntp@dosomethingwiththis.miisconsultant.com> wrote in message
news:uWaMRMcvHHA.1104@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Yes but with the firstInitial example:
>
> \\server\share\ has 26 sub-folders
> \\server\share\a has ~1500 sub-folders
> \\server\share\b has ~1500 sub-folders
> \\server\share\q has ~10 sub-folders -)
>
>
> Should I not be concerend that an admin that navigates to \\server\share
> will get back 30,000 folders? I'm assuming explorer would barf at that.
>
>
> "SBS Rocker" <noreply@NoDomain.com> wrote in message
> news:e4N1DSbvHHA.2352@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> I'm confused on what exactly you're asking. These are user home folders
>> correct? So every user will need their own home folder. What's the
>> difference between
>>
>> \\server\share\%firstInitial%\%username% and \\server\share\%username%
>>
>> Either way it is still 30,000 folders.
>>
>> "-Steve-" <nntp@dosomethingwiththis.miisconsultant.com> wrote in message
>> news:%23I5FdGbvHHA.4332@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>> I'm not worried about creating 30,000 folders. I'm worried about
>>> creating 30,000 folders in one parent folder. When I go to
>>> \\server\share there's going to be 30,000 folders to wade through.
>>>
>>>
>>> "SBS Rocker" <noreply@NoDomain.com> wrote in message
>>> news:uz$bL%23avHHA.1204@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>>> Well with 30,000 users I can't see how you can get away from having to
>>>> creaate 30,000 user folders. Your first suggestion will work. Just
>>>> create a script that edits their profile to point to
>>>> \\servername\users\%username%
>>>>
>>>> "-Steve-" <nntp@dosomethingwiththis.miisconsultant.com> wrote in
>>>> message news:O%233Ab7avHHA.4516@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>>>>I have ~30,000 users who's home drives we're going to migrate to a
>>>>>central
>>>>> location? I'm trying to determine how best to layout these folders.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ideally I would like to simply use \\server\share\%username%, but that
>>>>> would
>>>>> create a folder with 30,000 folders in it. That seems like it would
>>>>> be hard
>>>>> to manage, and might not be a good idea.
>>>>>
>>>>> Other idea's I've had is to do
>>>>> \\server\share\%firstInitial%\%username% but
>>>>> that makes scripting a little tougher.
>>>>>
>>>>> Any other ideas?
>>>>>
>>>>> Steve
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

 

[-Steve-]

Why? What's the added value of creating 26 additional shares?


"SBS Rocker" <noreply@NoDomain.com> wrote in message
news:OpHLHScvHHA.4796@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> OK now I see what you're talking about. I agree about the bark part. It
> will mostly likely freeze Explorer. You have quite some cleanup ahead of
> you. that said I do now like your first suggestion using first initial.
> But I would take it one level higher.
>
> \\server\shareA\%username%
> \\server\shareB\%username%
>
>
> "-Steve-" <nntp@dosomethingwiththis.miisconsultant.com> wrote in message
> news:uWaMRMcvHHA.1104@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> Yes but with the firstInitial example:
>>
>> \\server\share\ has 26 sub-folders
>> \\server\share\a has ~1500 sub-folders
>> \\server\share\b has ~1500 sub-folders
>> \\server\share\q has ~10 sub-folders -)
>>
>>
>> Should I not be concerend that an admin that navigates to \\server\share
>> will get back 30,000 folders? I'm assuming explorer would barf at that.
>>
>>
>> "SBS Rocker" <noreply@NoDomain.com> wrote in message
>> news:e4N1DSbvHHA.2352@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>> I'm confused on what exactly you're asking. These are user home folders
>>> correct? So every user will need their own home folder. What's the
>>> difference between
>>>
>>> \\server\share\%firstInitial%\%username% and \\server\share\%username%
>>>
>>> Either way it is still 30,000 folders.
>>>
>>> "-Steve-" <nntp@dosomethingwiththis.miisconsultant.com> wrote in message
>>> news:%23I5FdGbvHHA.4332@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>>> I'm not worried about creating 30,000 folders. I'm worried about
>>>> creating 30,000 folders in one parent folder. When I go to
>>>> \\server\share there's going to be 30,000 folders to wade through.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "SBS Rocker" <noreply@NoDomain.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:uz$bL%23avHHA.1204@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>>>> Well with 30,000 users I can't see how you can get away from having to
>>>>> creaate 30,000 user folders. Your first suggestion will work. Just
>>>>> create a script that edits their profile to point to
>>>>> \\servername\users\%username%
>>>>>
>>>>> "-Steve-" <nntp@dosomethingwiththis.miisconsultant.com> wrote in
>>>>> message news:O%233Ab7avHHA.4516@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>I have ~30,000 users who's home drives we're going to migrate to a
>>>>>>central
>>>>>> location? I'm trying to determine how best to layout these folders.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ideally I would like to simply use \\server\share\%username%, but
>>>>>> that would
>>>>>> create a folder with 30,000 folders in it. That seems like it would
>>>>>> be hard
>>>>>> to manage, and might not be a good idea.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Other idea's I've had is to do
>>>>>> \\server\share\%firstInitial%\%username% but
>>>>>> that makes scripting a little tougher.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Any other ideas?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Steve
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>