Has anyone had problems using ReFS for the disk groups?

[Joe_Pineda]

Our next major project: the environment will probaly be OnBase 15, and we would like to use the Microsoft Resilient File System. UNC's will still be used. Storage usage will probable surpass 70TB. Any issues with ReFS?  I'd appreciate it if you share your experiences.

[AdamShaneHyland · Accepted solution]

Hi Jose,

Thanks for the post. 

While you may have received an answer to your request already, I wanted to follow up with a response for others in the Community researching this topic.  Hyland QA has tested the use of ReFS as a supported File System for Platter Management & Distributed Service (ie Distributed Disk Services) since February 2013.  From a testing perspective, ReFS is transparent and about the same as the switch from FAT32 to NTFS.

There are a couple caveats about using ReFS.  First, Distributed File System (DFS) has issues because it locks a file for replication before the entire file has been written.  Second, Encrypting File System (EFS) has never been tested against, but it is expected that there would be an additional performance hit due to the nature of the decryption which would need to occur.

As for the size of your storage needs, this has not been tested and I would have to rely on someone in the Community to share their knowledge from experience.

Take care.

[Robert_King5]

Good Morning - Are there any updates to this post?