Symbol Server without Virtual Root Cache


  • Hi (this started at and i was advised to post elsewhere then corrected to  here)

    I am after help on setting up a http: symbol server for visual studio 2010 use.
    Note i mean http://server:80 type of approach

    NOT the UNC srv:<UNC path>

    Due to Domain trust issues with the remote location (where we would like to run this), a UNC path can't be used, but the http: approach should work within our intranet.

    We can NAT the addresses to get to the service and turn off security at the remote end (i.e. this will not be available via the internet, only the intranet)

    NB: I am not talking a about a Symbol Proxy Server (with its own cache)

    e.g. want

    <us - our cache>  <==== http:80====> <them - say symstore on same machine A> <-- refs -> <machine B>

    The symbols at the remote location have pointers to the the dll / pdbs which live on another server.
    So at Machine A we have 500Meg of symbols with references to the actual files on Machine B which has Terrabytes of disk used.

    What we DONT want is for the system to "cache" symbols on their side, i.e. crazy to have terrabytes to be duplicated when the server has direct access to the files...

    On our side we would cache, to ensure only one download occurred to the remote location.
    At the remote location NO caching to occur. Just fetch the files through their UNC paths.

    e.g. without caching at the SymProxy.
    i.e. no virtual root of the Web site file copy

    >> I am after this technology ?


    As a suggestion, if the web service was placed on the of the machine with the source, could the virtual root be made the same as the existing location ?

    Symbol server on Machine B - Sets virtual root to start of actual binaries on machine B
                                                References Machine A for the symbol store, Machine A has REF pointers to where the files are on Machine B

    However the system would need to be smart enough not to copy source to destination, as both these would be the same location !!!

     Thanks in advance

    Tuesday, January 29, 2013 8:50 AM


All replies