On 04/07/12 18:12, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 11:11 AM, steve <[email protected]> wrote:
On 03/07/12 10:18, Jonathan Buzzard wrote:
On Mon, 2012-07-02 at 18:20 +0200, steve wrote:
NFS and autofs buys you some very, very useful things. One is that it
can support multiple upstream NFS servers, which might help distribute
the load for 2500 users. Another is that by automounting a set of
subdirectories, instead of one large master share, you can tune the
settings of those mounted directories for security. Another is that
you can mix NFSv3 and NFSv4 for environments that need TCP based
access or Kerberized authentication for fileshares. Another is that
unused material is not mounted and can be deleted or re-arranged on
the fileserver, which is priceless when managing 2500 accounts with
2500 home directories.
But with 2500 users, and hundreds at a time connected, it's maybe time
to think about running the CIFS fileshares directly on the NFS
*servers* and get the Samba clients out of the way Why introduce a
layer of complexity with a Samba client on top of NFS if the
fileserver can do it directly? And if it's too much for one
fileserver, maybe it's time to think about splitting up fileservices
anyway.
Hi Nico
Yeah, we have to stick with the automounter. Having 2500 home
directories held up for only 80 (max) users can't be a good idea.
Without a cluster, I can't see how we could deploy multiple NFS servers
though. We have 2 replicating DC's one of which is the fileserver.
How nice it would be if we could replicate the data over to DC2 and replicate
the fileserver and it failedover if necessary.
Cheers,
Steve
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
