On Fri, 2006-03-17 at 17:14 -0600, Abhijith Das wrote: > Hi List, > From what I've read in many mailing lists, Samba 3 is not truly > clusterable. > > From what I understand, people have been able to cluster Samba with > varying levels of success. Transparent failover and active-active file > serving ( 2 or more smbs serving the same files (through a cluster > filesystem like GFS) from multiple cluster nodes simultaneously ) are > two things that are not possible with the current Samba. Or are there > more issues as well? > > There were discussions however, that mentioned clustering being scoped > into Samba 4. Can somebody elaborate on clustering support in Samba 4?
So, when the relevant layers were constructed in Samba4, one of the design goals was to allow clustering, because this is a feature vendors of clustered filesystems have wanted, and because this kind of thing is harder to add later if the problem is ignored. The comments you may have read presumed (at the time) that retrofitting this to Samba3 would be particularly difficult. However, since that time, a large amount of work has been done on the Samba3 codebase to allow clustering in practise, and I expect to see further work in this area. (Samba4's cluster capabilities should be powerful, but only exist in theory, there is no clustered backend yet). I hope that clarifies things a bit. Andrew Bartlett -- Andrew Bartlett http://samba.org/~abartlet/ Authentication Developer, Samba Team http://samba.org Student Network Administrator, Hawker College http://hawkerc.net
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
