Hot answers tagged

6

There always will be a maximum upload size for each web application, maximum timeout time in IIS for for each IIS site and a lot of other soft limits (thresholds, can be changed), but hard limits (boundaries) can never be changed. https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc262787%28v=office.15%29.aspx states: Boundaries are absolute limits that cannot ...


4

Whilst a content database can contain more than one site collection. A site collection however, can contain only one content database. RBS can be used to prevent database growth as it stores data in physical location. See more about RBS here: https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee748649.aspx?f=255&MSPPError=-2147217396


4

I think you should be aware that if you are using Remote BLOB Storage (RBS), the total volume of remote BLOB storage and metadata in the content database must not exceed the 200GB limit. Check Software boundaries and limits for SharePoint 2013 This also corroborates to the guidance that RBS does not increase the storage limits of content databases. All ...


4

I think Ransher Singh has covered off your problem quite well. As for a solution, your original idea of splitting your data into multiple content databases is the right one. It can however be a complex and painful process if you are not using third party tools. You can roll your own using SPExport and SPImport to export existing webs or libraries or even ...


3

200 GB is the suggested maximum limit to simplify your life and provides databases in manageable chunks. i dont think any body likes having to restore a 4TB database or BLOB data since it takes a while.Backup & Recovery make the things hard for administrators. If you deciede to go beyond the 200GB limit then follow things you have to check. Disk sub-...


3

No, You cant have one site collections in more than one content DB. Yes, you can use the RBS to increase the database storage. If your site collection grow beyond the 200GB(i am guessing you hreach 200GB not 4Tb) limit, i would highly recommend that perform the cleanup operation on the site collection and delete the unwanted stuff. Or split the site into ...


3

IMO, you should definitely use RBS because majority of files are larger than 1MB. In your case, your DB can further grow exceptionally large because of all the binary large object (BLOB) data. And, Reading and writing BLOBs, as well as other relational data, can slow down SQL Server performance because it’s not the ideal place for storing BLOBs. By using RBS ...


3

The technet page RJ linked to in his comment is one that I refer customers and management to all the time. These limits are there for a reason and they mention special scenarios where these limits can be broken. For example: Content databases of up to 4 TB are supported when the following requirements are met: Disk sub-system performance of 0.25 ...


3

This is expected behavior. RBS is supported by a remote BLOB store Maintainer (RBS Maintainer), which is a process performing garbage collection besides RBS other maintenance tasks. The deletion behavior is based on the following: Any BLOB references that are present in the RBS auxiliary tables but absent in any RBS column in application tables, as well ...


2

It is very important to take note of the filestream provider name. Then you can detach database, and copy primary file, log file and BLOB storage folder to new server and attach. It is also important to remember to enable FILESTREAM on all nodes of the cluster. Without it, SQL query to attach database doesn't work. SharePoint 2010 - moving databases to new ...


2

You don't have RBS installed for the second database, as indicated by $rbss.Installed() returning false. You must first install RBS for this database before you can enable it. Now this one is a bit tricky - MSDN documentation for some reason doesn't actually list all the steps required to properly install it, at least for SP2010. However, this blog does - it'...


2

When using RBS what is the total size limit that can be uploaded to SharePoint? Is there any size limitation concerning the data? Per file: The absolute maximum size per file that can be uploaded is 2GB - RBS does not change this. Per content db: The standard 200GB (on SP2010 and 2013) or 100GB (on SP2007) includes both the data within the SQL db (i.e. ...


2

RBS isn't configured correctly. You need to have master key in your SharePoint Content database. Use the following command to add it: use [ContentDbName] if not exists (select * from sys.symmetric_keys where name = N'##MS_DatabaseMasterKey##') create master key encryption by password = N'Admin Key Password !2#4' Source


2

200GB is the recommended size, but it can go upwards of 4TB. I imagine they still recommend not to go over 200GB in an RBS scenario incase you have to internalize the blobs. You wouldn't want to have a 3TB blob store and have to internalize it back into SQL server. Suddenly you have a mess on your hands. When the DBs get that large, back up and recovery ...


2

Ok I found the problem: $cdb.RemoteBlobStorageSettings.MinimumBlobStorageSize=1048576 1048576 is not 1MB as described in the guides. I've set this value to 0 and now BLOB are saved correctly. $cdb.RemoteBlobStorageSettings.MinimumBlobStorageSize=0 I've read is not suggested to use RBS with file with size under 500KB, so I'll probably change this value ...


1

Please verify the steps you had followed to install the RBS on your WFE server. Experience of Configuring Remote Blob Storage (RBS) with SharePoint 2010 Please let me know if it did not work for you.


1

No different than if you were not using RBS. RBS data 'counts' against database size. https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc262787.aspx#ContentDB


1

It is possible to implement RBS without a 3rd party solution. The provider from Microsoft is called FILESTREAM and gets shipped with SQL-Server. Please consider the following before implementing any solution to externalize your BLOBs: Read the following excellent Technet-Article: Deciding to use RBS in SharePoint 2013 Every RBS-Solution (FILESTREAM or 3rd ...


1

Quote from Technet: RBS includes a FILESTREAM provider that lets you use RBS to store BLOBs on an instance of SQL Server. If you want use RBS to store BLOBs in a different storage solution, you have to use a third party RBS provider developed for that storage solution In other words: If you use FILESTREAM, you can store BLOBs only to a disk that appears as ...


1

Before answering your questions, i want to recommend the following excellent technet article: Deciding to use RBS in SharePoint 2013 Just because you have a content database growing larger than 200GB, you do not have to implement RBS. RBS is mainly a feature to reduce storage-cost by getting BLOBs away from expensive SQL-Storage (like SSDs). RBS adds a lot ...


1

Back when I was testing StoragePoint before they were acquired by Metalogix, I was seeing anywhere from 97 to 99% Content DB size reduction. The tool allowed for a lot ot flexibility in determining what types and size limits of fiels that should be offloaded. The more aggressive the file size limit you made, the more was offloaded and the smaller your ...


1

Here are the steps which you need to perform. Stop Content Db to use RBS and Move in all the Files inside the DB from Blob Folder. Verity that files are inside Sql DB by running query. Test by uploading file to Site and verify it stores in sql DB. backup and restore the DB to your new SharePoint 2013 environment. If its a classic mode web app in 2010 then ...


1

I successfully migrated RBS enabled database into new cluster. This article was very helpful: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd283097.aspx. It is very important to take note of the filestream provider name. Then you can detach database, and copy primary file, log file and BLOB storage folder to new server and attach. It is also important to ...


1

System.IO.Stream should work as it can handle streams of in theory infinite length. [update] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/437043/best-way-to-handle-a-large-download-site That's a good read.


1

Yes they would still exist multiple times. It sounds like you might want to employ the Link to Document content type in your libraries that will let you create a pointer reference to an existing item.


1

For the second, or more content databases, again run the SQL script, changing the values of ContentDbName where present to reflect the Content Database. Instead of the original msiexec command, run the following msiexec command on subsequent databases: 1 msiexec /qn /lvx* rbs_install_log_ContentDbName.txt /i RBS.msi REMOTEBLOBENABLE=1 ...


1

RBS utilize MS SQL filestream feature inside. Filestream files have set the same permissions as in the database. So if you have access to SharePoint database you can also access files representing externally stored data.


1

If you go about it the right way by using farm solutions and the standards I don't think you will have a problem. It would be if you're modifying base code for SharePoint itself or the database structure overall where you would probably run into problems getting support. Microsoft will probably NOT support your custom RBS solution, though. We use a ...


1

By default, when versioning is enabled, a specific version you're adding will only be stored in RBS if its size is at least MinimumBlobStorageSize bytes. Usually, this threshold is specified via PowerShell for a specific content database. However, SharePoint is also smart enough that if you create a new version only as a result of metadata editing (e.g. ...


1

SharePoint Store data into Content Database, Documents are stored as Binary Large OBjects or BLOBs within the content database. Problem when you made actual change to file(15MB) sharepoint save a another copy of file with new version. that's fine but when you made changes to MetaData SharePoint again treat it new version stored another copy. So in RBS, ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible