On Fri, 19 Nov 1999, James Ervin wrote:
>
> The problems with Samba we've had are several:
>
>
> 3) Copying large files seemed to be a problem, on occasion, and it was
> time-related rather than size-related. We eventually determined that it
> was dropping the token after 7 minutes--which apparently is the minimum
> possible lifespan. For some Windows machines, even small files take this
> long to copy. A colleague of mine thinks he's pinpointed the piece of code
> to alter so we can change this to 25 hours, the default in our
> environment, but we haven't tried it yet.
>
Does this occur using the changes that utilize the "--with-pam" modifications
to pass_check.c
> There are advantages to the Samba solution, though, the most important
> being the file locking, which works properly since it's an SMB share. This
> is critical for the Office apps, which all seem to employ the kind of file
> locking AFS can't cope with.
>
Yes its works for supporting locking on a single Samba server, but how would
information about locks be shared across a farm of Samba/AFS gateway machines
providing access for an entire campus?
Has anyone thought about doing a distributed lock manager (or already has one)
for a farm of Samba servers providing a gateway to distributed file space such
as AFS or DFS.
> I'd be very interested in hearing anyone's experience with this. We are
> also interested in load-balancing connections to a group of identical
> Samba servers, and have no idea how to approach that problem as yet. This
> is more critical than it sounds, since we may have to deploy some sort of
> solution for thousands of extant Windows 95/98 machines, and as much as we
> like Linux, the scalability needs to be there if that's the case, and
> load-balancing may be required.
I would also be interested in this.
--
Terry McCoy email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sr Systems Engineer phone: (219) 631-4274
Enterprise Systems Software
Office of Information Technologies
University of Notre Dame
