Hi Dan--
I''m afraid that we don''t know a huge amount about Samba on
Lustre at the
moment, except that it works well in basic testing. But we''d be happy
to
help learn about this with you, and I can tell you what we do know:
On 12/13/2004 21:43, Dan Stromberg wrote:>
> How stable is lustre (with what version(s)) in combination with Samba
> (with what version(s))?
Several CFS employees (including me) use Samba at home, to provide Lustre
file system access to Windows and OS/X clients. So we know that it works
well and reliably on the scale of a few clients, but we do not have
information about hundreds or thousands of nodes.
I think we''re running the versions of Samba that ship with Red Hat
Linux 9
and Fedora Core 2, so we know those work OK. I would expect that others do
too.
We''ve been doing that for a long time, at least a year, so pretty much
every
version since Lustre 1.0 should be able to export samba OK.
> Can it be made to be reliable?
I certainly believe so, if it''s not already. Because Samba is a
userspace
server, we have many many fewer problems than we do with the kernel NFS
server, which uses the underlying file system in unique ways.
> Can it be made to do large filesystems (on the order of 32 terabytes)?
Because Samba just does normal open/close/read/write calls to the file
system, I would be very very surprised if it could not export a large file
system.
> Can it be made to do > 2G files on 32 bit hardware?
This, I''m not so sure. We''ll run a quick test here, but you
might also want
to check with the Samba folks; this might be a FAQ.
Finally, one of our existing Lustre support sites is interested in exporting
a very large Lustre FS, to a large number of non-Linux clients, using Samba.
So if you want to wait, we''ll probably have much better information in
a few
months.
Thanks--
-Phil