[Samba] Samba failover causes different UID's
Hi, I have two machines in a cluster and want to create a high available samba share that connects to active directory for user information. The storage is DRBD and the filesystem is XFS. I'm using pacemaker as cluster software and using the lsb:samba init script. I connected both machines to my Windows AD server and tested this using winbind. winbind -u gives me all AD users which seems fine. This works on both machines so everything looks ok. When I connect from a windows client to the samba share I don't need to enter credentials so that looks fine too. When I start to put some files on the share the correct credentials are used when I check with ls -al on the mountpoint in linux. So far so good. BUT when I do a failover to the other node the share is up but suddenly I cannot connect from the windows client anymore without entering credentials and when I check with ls -al on the mountpoint on the other machine it maps the existing files (which I put there when the share was running on the other node) suddenly with whole different UID's. Where is the mapping of UID's taking place and how can I fix this? Both systems lookup their user information from the same AD server, how can they still lookup different UID's when looking at the same server and files? Kind regards, Caspar Smit -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Re: [Samba] Samba Failover
If I understand you correctly, you are going to deploy Samba as a BDC to a Windows PDC. This won't work. See section 6.4.2 of the Samba HOWTO Collection. What you would need to do is set up a Samba PDC with LDAP and then set up the second box as a Samba BDC with a slave LDAP database. -Chris On Thu, 2003-09-04 at 11:31, Alan Hicks wrote: This problem has just been dumped into my lap over the last two or three days. I'm hopelessly in over my head here, and I'm hoping I can get some direction here. I've been searching google for some time, and not come up with my answers. Warning, much of what you are about to hear is ludicrously stupid on a technical level. I work for a small computer consulting firm. One of our clients is running a Windows 2000 file and print server with ADS. We intend to format this machine and reload Windows 2000, but without ADS. This server houses files for a proprietary program that is unsupported if the file server used is Samba. This client has about 20 computers at their offices, no more than a dozen of which ever use the server at the same time. The one machine is far more than enough to handle the load, but they decided they need failover (even though they've never had this server crash). They have purchased two Dell servers with SCSI hard drives and Intel Xeon 2,4 Ghz processors (yes, to do file and print sharing for 20 users; I told you it was ludicrous). My PHB has signed a contract with them to install Linux OSs on these boxes, and run Samba on them. Since their proprietary application isn't supported for Samba, they aren't going to move it over to either of these machines. These machines are only to do authentication in the unlikely event that the PDC (the Windows 2000 machines) should fail. I've done a lot of google searching and haven't come up with many leads. Is there a HOW-TO fr setting up Samba in a failover environment, specifically in making it play nice with a Windows PDC? The goal here is to have zero downtime, but I don't think the client understands that if those files for his application aren't present on the Samba servers, authenticating with them won't help him at all. -- -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] Samba Failover
Alan, I haven't run samba with ads but as far as failover i have a redhat 8 server with samba 2.27 running as a PDC on it dell hardware raid, scsi etc and a another dell box low end server (redhat 8 samba 2.27) with ide drives and 2 80 gig drives, I do a rsync 2 times a day, I have two domains if one box the first box fails all i have to do is change the domain name and host name i will be able to authenticate all the users without a problem. It is the closest thing to keeping a hot standby Hope this helps a bit. Raj -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Alan Hicks Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 9:31 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Samba] Samba Failover This problem has just been dumped into my lap over the last two or three days. I'm hopelessly in over my head here, and I'm hoping I can get some direction here. I've been searching google for some time, and not come up with my answers. Warning, much of what you are about to hear is ludicrously stupid on a technical level. I work for a small computer consulting firm. One of our clients is running a Windows 2000 file and print server with ADS. We intend to format this machine and reload Windows 2000, but without ADS. This server houses files for a proprietary program that is unsupported if the file server used is Samba. This client has about 20 computers at their offices, no more than a dozen of which ever use the server at the same time. The one machine is far more than enough to handle the load, but they decided they need failover (even though they've never had this server crash). They have purchased two Dell servers with SCSI hard drives and Intel Xeon 2,4 Ghz processors (yes, to do file and print sharing for 20 users; I told you it was ludicrous). My PHB has signed a contract with them to install Linux OSs on these boxes, and run Samba on them. Since their proprietary application isn't supported for Samba, they aren't going to move it over to either of these machines. These machines are only to do authentication in the unlikely event that the PDC (the Windows 2000 machines) should fail. I've done a lot of google searching and haven't come up with many leads. Is there a HOW-TO fr setting up Samba in a failover environment, specifically in making it play nice with a Windows PDC? The goal here is to have zero downtime, but I don't think the client understands that if those files for his application aren't present on the Samba servers, authenticating with them won't help him at all. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/19/2003 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/19/2003 -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] samba failover plan on unix OS using hardware RAID
Hi all, I've been asked to produce a plan for samba failover for an office with about 30 2000/XP machines and a few unix servers. We currently have a FreeBSD single-harddrive SCSI box providing samba, dhcp and dns services. Reliability and cost are the priorities, in that order, over speed/performance. We just need the reliability - we don't ever ever want to have to switch to a new pdc. We could afford a few hours downtime in an emergency, and there would be no data to save, just configs which are easily backed up on a daily basis - I just need to assure my bosses that the trust relationship between the pdc and the XP clients won't be broken, even with a hardware failure. So, my suggestion is IDE hardware RAID 1, single but very good raid card, which can be replaced within a few hours by a trusted vendor, and 2 mirrored harddrives. What I would appreciate in terms of feedback is first, a basic sanity check - is this a standard and good plan? If not - what is and why? And second - I would really like to hear any real-life stories involving samba with hardware RAID on unix. Did anyone have a RAID, blow a harddrive, and have to/not have to rebuild the XP - trust relationship? Thanks much in advance for your time, Jeanne Schock Systems Administrator Regionalhelpwanted.com -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] samba failover plan on unix OS using hardware RAID
So, my suggestion is IDE hardware RAID 1, Since you asked, I would go with Raid 5. Your load being 20-30 clients is very light. is this a standard and good plan? Depends on many factors as your prereqs are generic being reliability and cost. I mean thats just about every ones prereq. You need to define; 1) data type 2) amertization period if any and I'm sure you have some kind of life span for both this need and tech used. 3) growth over time with hardware RAID on unix. Although my prereq are more intense than most on here, I would still suggest an external SCSI to IDE Raid box having SCSI 160/320 to a SCSI card in your PC. I would also suggest using XFS for Linux as a file system and testing viablity of RH9 if you plan to use RH that is. I've had both the 3ware internal SCSI to IDE and external RAID box being SCSI to IDE and I vote the latter Bcuz; 1) Better performance as the i/o is spread amongst the RAID box and the SCSI card. 2) Better reliability as you can get the external RAID box with hot swap for on the fly replacement of drives. 3) More controlled env as a good RAID box will have proper ventilation, etc while using a 3ware, you have to make sure your PC case has proper cooling. 4) Ease of install as you don't have to rely on specialized RAID drivers for your OS, only plain SCSI drivers being that the nature of this is host independant. Plus, don't go to cheap and being penny wise can be pound foolish. Bri- __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] samba failover plan on unix OS using hardware RAID
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 12:25 PM To: Jeanne Schock; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Samba] samba failover plan on unix OS using hardware RAID Bri- I appreciate the comments. To answer some questions - This is an office with a limited number of personnel that isn't going to grow significantly over the next 12-18 months, which is as far as I can look. It will just be serving up samba, dns, dhcp - that's all, not even acting as a file server. I don't think that IDE RAID, with a top quality card, is short-sighted in this regard. That said - I will take a good look at your comments re. scsi hardware. thanks a lot. define my needs: while I agree that reliability is a bit generic, the need I have defined is very specific, and wasn't outright addressed in your comments. I need to be certain, that if one harddrive fails, that the other harddrive will continue as the pdc without any disturbance between XP client and samba server, ie. no loss of trust relationship. Simply put, my bosses want proof that a RAID will provide this failover, and I can't find anything definite on the net on this issue. Thanks again, Jeanne Schock -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] samba failover plan on unix OS using hardware RAID
Jeanne Schock said on Fri, Jun 13, 2003 at 01:19:42PM -0400: comments. I need to be certain, that if one harddrive fails, that the other harddrive will continue as the pdc without any disturbance between XP client and samba server, ie. no loss of trust relationship. Simply put, my bosses want proof that a RAID will provide this failover, and I can't find anything definite on the net on this issue. The RAID hardware is far below samba (or even the operating system), by design. The way that a RAID 5 works is that if you lose 1 drive, nothing notices (except the RAID monitor software, which will hopefully start calling pagers to get the failed drive replaced). Samba won't even notice that the drive has failed. RAID won't protect you against the whole machine crashing/power outaging/getting it's network card unplugged from the wall by a janitor, though. Something to keep in mind is that most IDE RAIDs don't let you hot swap drives, so while you won't instantly crash when you lose a drive, you will have to shutdown the computer to perform the disk replacement. M pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] samba failover plan on unix OS using hardware RAID
The RAID hardware is far below samba (or even the operating system), by design. The way that a RAID 5 works is that if you lose 1 drive, nothing notices (except the RAID monitor software, which will hopefully start calling pagers to get the failed drive replaced). Samba won't even notice that the drive has failed. exactly what I needed, thank you very much. Just needed someone out there to confirm. RAID 5 will do it. And I'm not worried about hot swapping - we can have even a few hours downtime if needed. Thanks Mark and to others that responded. Jeanne -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Samba failover
Well, I was wondering how to setup samba installations to provide fail-over for linux boxes that will be acting as a print-server for windows clients in an NT Domain (windows PDC and WINS servers). I didn't see any ideas in The Unofficial Samba Howto and the Samba- HOWTO-Collection. I was thinking having two print-servers NATed behind a linux router, and have the linux router do port forwarding on 137-139 to the main samba print-server, which talks to LPRng to talk to network attached printers. If the samba print-server goes down then switch the port-forwarding destination to the backup box with a similar configuration. What are the better ways? If there aren't any (which I doubt), is this even workable (I'm not sure having these two samba servers with the same netbios name, etc, is workable). Thanks for any ideas, ~ Daniel --- This message is the property of Time Inc. or its affiliates. It may be legally privileged and/or confidential and is intended only for the use of the addressee(s). No addressee should forward, print, copy, or otherwise reproduce this message in any manner that would allow it to be viewed by any individual not originally listed as a recipient. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any unauthorized disclosure, dissemination, distribution, copying or the taking of any action in reliance on the information herein is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify the sender and delete this message. Thank you. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
