Chris's Wiki :: blog/sysadmin/WhyNFSSamba Commentshttps://utcc.utoronto.ca/~cks/space/blog/sysadmin/WhyNFSSamba?atomcommentsDWiki2022-07-14T07:05:43ZRecent comments in Chris's Wiki :: blog/sysadmin/WhyNFSSamba.By has on /blog/sysadmin/WhyNFSSambatag:CSpace:blog/sysadmin/WhyNFSSamba:d60de79dc7cae48ce0704f59368c3555c9258ebehas<div class="wikitext"><p>At one very large (engineering-oriented) site that I’m aware of, all of the Unix NFS file systems are also exported from their originating hosts as Samba shares, then joined together for the Windows clients in one massive MSDFS that is maintained by scripts, based on the automount tables. A Linux client would use /data/stuff and Windows could use \\thedfs\data\stuff to get to the same place.</p>
</div>2022-07-14T07:05:43ZBy Chris Siebenmann on /blog/sysadmin/WhyNFSSambatag:CSpace:blog/sysadmin/WhyNFSSamba:aa4038b9f2fb3b624988ab0f7321fcbe149eb36fChris Siebenmann<div class="wikitext"><p>NetApps are expensive, especially if you want hardware redundancy.
We're (part of) a university, operating on a relatively shoestring
budget; this is why we've assembled <a href="https://utcc.utoronto.ca/~cks/space/blog/solaris/ZFSFileserverSetup">this environment</a> from <a href="https://utcc.utoronto.ca/~cks/space/blog/linux/LinuxISCSITargets">inexpensive, do it yourself
components</a>.</p>
<p>(You can argue that staff time is expensive enough that a NetApp
pays for itself, but <a href="https://utcc.utoronto.ca/~cks/space/blog/tech/UniversitiesSunkStaff">that's a hard argument at universities</a>.)</p>
</div>2010-10-05T21:29:38ZFrom 63.171.219.94 on /blog/sysadmin/WhyNFSSambatag:CSpace:blog/sysadmin/WhyNFSSamba:647a453bfb1b26780338854ae9e88da78f811c03From 63.171.219.94<div class="wikitext"><p>Have you ever considered using netapp for your storage? It seems like you are constanly fighting zfs, nfs, smb and other storage oddities. Netapp would probably just work without all the fighting. Mapping between cifs and nfs happens transparently.</p>
</div>2010-10-05T20:49:42ZBy Chris Siebenmann on /blog/sysadmin/WhyNFSSambatag:CSpace:blog/sysadmin/WhyNFSSamba:223cf2b45326dfd96a8831b53aa1c0f705a48920Chris Siebenmann<div class="wikitext"><p>As far as I can see, having Windows machines use NFS has two large
problems. First, it would expose the whole 'which filesystem comes
from which server' issue to them. Second, as far as I know it has
much worse practical security issues with access control.</p>
<p>Having the IP address appear can (only) be avoided by having an
already established identity here. I have to set these up by hand,
but I'm happy to do so for people who are going to be (semi-)regular
commentators. Send me email to let me know the name you want (it has
to be ASCII with no whitespace, but mixed case and '.' and so on is
allowed).</p>
</div>2010-10-05T15:49:59ZFrom 207.112.67.77 on /blog/sysadmin/WhyNFSSambatag:CSpace:blog/sysadmin/WhyNFSSamba:41f92584d0291e797b95e15ee61410a4743040fdFrom 207.112.67.77<div class="wikitext"><p>From my little world of 4 windows shares and 1 readonly nfs I am in awe of your "mid-sized" system.</p>
<p>When you say 4 servers and 200 filesystems are the servers combining the filesystems into one namespace, or are the servers exporting 200 filessystems? Why so many filesystems?</p>
<p>Given a big budget would it be feasible to convert the 4 servers into one server? Would it make management easier? </p>
<p>WRT NFS for windows when I last looked at this the user mapping was a massive mess. I could see using it for a few users but I cannot see how it would scale. It is entirely possible that I was missing something.</p>
</div>2010-10-05T12:12:15ZFrom 78.94.202.93 on /blog/sysadmin/WhyNFSSambatag:CSpace:blog/sysadmin/WhyNFSSamba:31ec36b29bf2faaccbab75f64228a2ddd43501b1From 78.94.202.93<div class="wikitext"><p>What about using Windows NFS clients to avoid Samba servers?</p>
<p>Is this an option in practice?</p>
<p>PS: Is it somehow possible to post comments without publicizing the IP address?</p>
</div>2010-10-05T08:00:18Z