Andreas Dick wrote:
1) speed (I think samba is much slower than NFS, maybe this is not longer
valid?
NFS is faster than SMB in many cases, but these days it isn't such a big
difference, unless you handle large files (>1GB), where the performance
difference begins to be noticeable.
2) file attributes are different
I think Samba team never ever intended to copy all possible Unix
attributes and flags, but the basic set (user, group, other) is working
well.
3) special characters in filenames are handled different (was a mess in
the past, how is it now?)
Unicode saves the day. ;-)
On the ohter hand, if you setup and use ONLY samba shares, it could work
as you expect, but you should test it first!
As long as there are no special issues with mounted drives (for example,
if all drives are intended to be used as simple Windows shares in Domain
or as part of a Workgroup), there should be no issues with that.
(I plan to setup ebox from the scrach as well, and samba is as well an
option, but all my NFS files must be converted and I expect a hard job)
I think you should just check the attributes for anything that Samba
can't support; you can still export a directory as NFS volume and Samba
share at the same time; keep in mind, however, that there might be
issues with attributes, and you will not be able to control NFS via eBox
(and you might end up fixing LDAP manually, too); on the other hand,
there should be no problems with file locking or any other system issues.
_______________________________________________
ebox-user mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ebox-platform.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ebox-user
