On 28.09.2016 at 01:31 Gilberto Nunes wrote:> I am working harding for weeks to make things work properly to implement > samba and glusterfs and ZFS , to deploy storage sincronization between two > servers. > Today I just install Windows 2012 R2 and play around with DFS and see how > so deadly simple!!!! > And I wonder: why Linux or samba or both do not have similar tools to make > things less painful....This comment was clearly not a rant that samba has no GUI, as some have written here. It is a complaint that important functionality is either missing or does not work, and requires tedious workarounds. This misunderstanding confirms my suspicion that most samba admins have no idea how easy and enormously useful DFS and DFS-R are (and that many may not want to keep using Samba it they would know). On Windows servers I provide ALL shares via domain-based DFS, and replicate all directories with DFS-R to a second server. This is all very easy to setup and works just great. If one server was down, it quickly catches up, fully automatic, and without recursing through all directories. I can switch the users to the replica server just by running a small script that adjusts DFS priorities. This is wonderful, because it allows me to upgrade servers when I want, not when it fits the users, because there is no downtime. But unfortunately some servers here are running Samba. Tell a Windows admin that Samba is still unable to replicate its own Sysvol directory, and they will laugh at you. The docs say that domain-based DFS works for some. What does that mean? Does it work or does it not work? And which docs should I read? Samba still hosts docs that are so outdated that they cause more confusion than they provide help. How many years did it take to fix that tiny backup script to always use tdbbackup? Is it really correct now? Does it still need to be pulled from the source tarball? For Windows 10 I need to go back to protocol version 1, which Microsoft is about to disable by default. Whoa?!! For AD I must manually give all users a numerical ID? And the tab where this must be done is now going away! Are you joking? This means that things are getting worse instead of better. I must even seriously doubt the future of the whole project when it keeps depending on things that Microsoft has deprecated long ago and is about to expire. I had hoped that samba would eventually catch up a bit, but it rather feels like the distance to Microsoft is growing. Sure, Samba does also have advantages, but it costs me way too much time. I need something that just works out of the box, and is not severly limited to the most basic functionality. Windows server eventually also needs scripts for things that should be included (like for example to tell whether DFS-R is currently in sync or not), but the level where this requirement starts is higher. And it is much easier to find the right commands and required options, because there is much better documentation. sorry to disappoint you Klaus
I agreed! On Sep 28, 2016 7:45 PM, "Klaus Hartnegg via samba" <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote:> On 28.09.2016 at 01:31 Gilberto Nunes wrote: > >> I am working harding for weeks to make things work properly to implement >> samba and glusterfs and ZFS , to deploy storage sincronization between two >> servers. >> Today I just install Windows 2012 R2 and play around with DFS and see how >> so deadly simple!!!! >> And I wonder: why Linux or samba or both do not have similar tools to make >> things less painful.... >> > > This comment was clearly not a rant that samba has no GUI, as some have > written here. It is a complaint that important functionality is either > missing or does not work, and requires tedious workarounds. > > This misunderstanding confirms my suspicion that most samba admins have no > idea how easy and enormously useful DFS and DFS-R are (and that many may > not want to keep using Samba it they would know). > > On Windows servers I provide ALL shares via domain-based DFS, and > replicate all directories with DFS-R to a second server. This is all very > easy to setup and works just great. If one server was down, it quickly > catches up, fully automatic, and without recursing through all directories. > I can switch the users to the replica server just by running a small script > that adjusts DFS priorities. This is wonderful, because it allows me to > upgrade servers when I want, not when it fits the users, because there is > no downtime. > > But unfortunately some servers here are running Samba. > > Tell a Windows admin that Samba is still unable to replicate its own > Sysvol directory, and they will laugh at you. The docs say that > domain-based DFS works for some. What does that mean? Does it work or does > it not work? And which docs should I read? Samba still hosts docs that are > so outdated that they cause more confusion than they provide help. How many > years did it take to fix that tiny backup script to always use tdbbackup? > Is it really correct now? Does it still need to be pulled from the source > tarball? For Windows 10 I need to go back to protocol version 1, which > Microsoft is about to disable by default. Whoa?!! For AD I must manually > give all users a numerical ID? And the tab where this must be done is now > going away! Are you joking? This means that things are getting worse > instead of better. I must even seriously doubt the future of the whole > project when it keeps depending on things that Microsoft has deprecated > long ago and is about to expire. I had hoped that samba would eventually > catch up a bit, but it rather feels like the distance to Microsoft is > growing. > > Sure, Samba does also have advantages, but it costs me way too much time. > I need something that just works out of the box, and is not severly limited > to the most basic functionality. Windows server eventually also needs > scripts for things that should be included (like for example to tell > whether DFS-R is currently in sync or not), but the level where this > requirement starts is higher. And it is much easier to find the right > commands and required options, because there is much better documentation. > > sorry to disappoint you > Klaus > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the > instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Klaus Hartnegg via samba wrote:> On 28.09.2016 at 01:31 Gilberto Nunes wrote: >> I am working harding for weeks to make things work properly to implement >> samba and glusterfs and ZFS , to deploy storage sincronization >> between two >> servers. >> Today I just install Windows 2012 R2 and play around with DFS and see >> how >> so deadly simple!!!! >> And I wonder: why Linux or samba or both do not have similar tools to >> make >> things less painful.... > > This comment was clearly not a rant that samba has no GUI, as some > have written here. It is a complaint that important functionality is > either missing or does not work, and requires tedious workarounds. > > This misunderstanding confirms my suspicion that most samba admins > have no idea how easy and enormously useful DFS and DFS-R are (and > that many may not want to keep using Samba it they would know).Really? Easy and useful, huh? That's why i can't get our windows sysadmins to fix that PoS? DFS is an ugly underdeveloped hack! By your own admission you need scripts to tell whether DFS-R is currently in sync or not - WTF kind of BS is that for a GUI OS?> > On Windows servers I provide ALL shares via domain-based DFS, and > replicate all directories with DFS-R to a second server. This is all > very easy to setup and works just great. If one server was down, it > quickly catches up, fully automatic, and without recursing through all > directories. I can switch the users to the replica server just by > running a small script that adjusts DFS priorities. This is wonderful, > because it allows me to upgrade servers when I want, not when it fits > the users, because there is no downtime. > > But unfortunately some servers here are running Samba. > > Tell a Windows admin that Samba is still unable to replicate its own > Sysvol directory, and they will laugh at you. The docs say that > domain-based DFS works for some. What does that mean? Does it work or > does it not work? And which docs should I read? Samba still hosts docs > that are so outdated that they cause more confusion than they provide > help. How many years did it take to fix that tiny backup script to > always use tdbbackup? Is it really correct now? Does it still need to > be pulled from the source tarball? For Windows 10 I need to go back to > protocol version 1, which Microsoft is about to disable by default. > Whoa?!! For AD I must manually give all users a numerical ID? And the > tab where this must be done is now going away! Are you joking? This > means that things are getting worse instead of better. I must even > seriously doubt the future of the whole project when it keeps > depending on things that Microsoft has deprecated long ago and is > about to expire. I had hoped that samba would eventually catch up a > bit, but it rather feels like the distance to Microsoft is growing.wasn't SMB3_11 issue solved in SAMBA 4.3 like a year ago? meaning, what - two months after windows 10 release? now - i haven't used SAMBA as AD DC yet, so can't comment about other issues.> > Sure, Samba does also have advantages, but it costs me way too much > time. I need something that just works out of the box, and is not > severly limited to the most basic functionality. Windows server > eventually also needs scripts for things that should be included (like > for example to tell whether DFS-R is currently in sync or not), but > the level where this requirement starts is higher. And it is much > easier to find the right commands and required options, because there > is much better documentation. > > sorry to disappoint you > Klaus >
Am 29.09.2016 um 16:26 schrieb v g via samba:> Really? Easy and useful, huh?Live sync of directories is VERY useful. So useful that I just try to kill the purchase of EMC Isilon, precisely because it cannot replicate with Windows.
> This misunderstanding confirms my suspicion that most samba admins have no > idea how easy and enormously useful DFS and DFS-R are (and that many may not > want to keep using Samba it they would know).I have used DFS-R in an all-Windows environemnet, and don't miss it one bit.> On Windows servers I provide ALL shares via domain-based DFS, and replicate > all directories with DFS-R to a second server. This is all very easy to setup > and works just great. If one server was down, it quickly catches up, fully > automatic, and without recursing through all directories.It works just great, until you end up with one user on the wrong server due to a flaky network connection or whatever, then DFS-R doesn't know how to handle the conflicts when changes start coming in to a single directory from both directions (which to me makes it pretty clear that it is operating on the directory level). It is a poor man's replicated filesystem, always has been. If you want true clustered filesystem, you're going to have a much better time on Linux, unless you have the cash for very expensive hardware solutions.> Tell a Windows admin that Samba is still unable to replicate its own Sysvol > directory, and they will laugh at you.Tell a Linux admin that they have to use rsync to replicate the sysvol directory, and they will say "OK, makes sense". Samba is a Unix-based tool, so making use of other unix-based tools makes perfect sense. Though it would be nice if it could natively replcate with Windows DCs...> The docs say that domain-based DFS works for some. What does that mean? > Does it work or does it not work? And which docs should I read? Samba > still hosts docs that are so outdated that they cause more confusion > than they provide help.I agree that documentation like this can be confusing. Part of the confusion is probably that "DFS" means approximately 4 different things, which MS is partly to blame for. BTW, the first google search result for "samba domain-based dfs" points you to a page on the Samba wiki which tells you how to set it up. https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Distributed_File_System_(DFS)#Configure_domain-based_DFS_in_Samba I can see why some people may say it works, since it sounds like a somewhat hacky solution.> For AD I must manually give all users a numerical ID? And the tab where > this must be done is now going away! Are you joking? This means that > things are getting worse instead of better.For Linux users on a domain, you must give them all a numerical ID. This is true whether you are using Windows DCs or Samba DCs. The tab going away in MS's management tools is purely a Microsoft issue, unrelated to Samba. It will make UID management of Linux users with graphical tools impossible.> I must even seriously doubt the future of the whole project when it > keeps depending on things that Microsoft has deprecated long ago and is > about to expire. I had hoped that samba would eventually catch up a bit, > but it rather feels like the distance to Microsoft is growing.I agree that there are some parts of Samba that are looking a bit long in the tooth. To me, the biggest limtiation is lack of WMI support, so Samba can't synchronize with Windows DCs newer than 2008 R2. But, this is free software made mostly by volunteers who are reverse engineering interoperability with MS's products. If anything, it's a miracle that it works as well as it does...not to mention a testament to how well the developers do their jobs.
Am 29.09.2016 um 18:11 schrieb Sketch:> It works just great, until you end up with one user on the wrong server > due to a flaky network connection or whateverYou can choose whether you want automatic rollover. Just not set priorities, but disable the other DFS names.
But you now miccrosft deals wift gluster in windows server and azure: http://www.storageconsortium.de/content/content/microsoft-und-red-hat-bilden-neuen-standard-f%C3%BCr-enterprise-cloud-anwendungen And how need a gui to configure server components should stay with windows server. It is half an hour and samba 4 with glusterfs and replicating brick is up and running. Greetings Daniel EDV Daniel Müller Leitung EDV Tropenklinik Paul-Lechler-Krankenhaus Paul-Lechler-Str. 24 72076 Tübingen Tel.: 07071/206-463, Fax: 07071/206-499 Email: mueller at tropenklinik.de www.tropenklinik.de www.bauen-sie-mit.tropenklinik.de -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: v g via samba [mailto:samba at lists.samba.org] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 29. September 2016 16:26 An: samba at lists.samba.org Betreff: [SPAMVERDACHT] Re: [Samba] Good Bye SAMBA?!?!? Klaus Hartnegg via samba wrote:> On 28.09.2016 at 01:31 Gilberto Nunes wrote: >> I am working harding for weeks to make things work properly to >> implement samba and glusterfs and ZFS , to deploy storage >> sincronization between two servers. >> Today I just install Windows 2012 R2 and play around with DFS and see >> how so deadly simple!!!! >> And I wonder: why Linux or samba or both do not have similar tools to >> make things less painful.... > > This comment was clearly not a rant that samba has no GUI, as some > have written here. It is a complaint that important functionality is > either missing or does not work, and requires tedious workarounds. > > This misunderstanding confirms my suspicion that most samba admins > have no idea how easy and enormously useful DFS and DFS-R are (and > that many may not want to keep using Samba it they would know).Really? Easy and useful, huh? That's why i can't get our windows sysadmins to fix that PoS? DFS is an ugly underdeveloped hack! By your own admission you need scripts to tell whether DFS-R is currently in sync or not - WTF kind of BS is that for a GUI OS?> > On Windows servers I provide ALL shares via domain-based DFS, and > replicate all directories with DFS-R to a second server. This is all > very easy to setup and works just great. If one server was down, it > quickly catches up, fully automatic, and without recursing through all > directories. I can switch the users to the replica server just by > running a small script that adjusts DFS priorities. This is wonderful, > because it allows me to upgrade servers when I want, not when it fits > the users, because there is no downtime. > > But unfortunately some servers here are running Samba. > > Tell a Windows admin that Samba is still unable to replicate its own > Sysvol directory, and they will laugh at you. The docs say that > domain-based DFS works for some. What does that mean? Does it work or > does it not work? And which docs should I read? Samba still hosts docs > that are so outdated that they cause more confusion than they provide > help. How many years did it take to fix that tiny backup script to > always use tdbbackup? Is it really correct now? Does it still need to > be pulled from the source tarball? For Windows 10 I need to go back to > protocol version 1, which Microsoft is about to disable by default. > Whoa?!! For AD I must manually give all users a numerical ID? And the > tab where this must be done is now going away! Are you joking? This > means that things are getting worse instead of better. I must even > seriously doubt the future of the whole project when it keeps > depending on things that Microsoft has deprecated long ago and is > about to expire. I had hoped that samba would eventually catch up a > bit, but it rather feels like the distance to Microsoft is growing.wasn't SMB3_11 issue solved in SAMBA 4.3 like a year ago? meaning, what - two months after windows 10 release? now - i haven't used SAMBA as AD DC yet, so can't comment about other issues.> > Sure, Samba does also have advantages, but it costs me way too much > time. I need something that just works out of the box, and is not > severly limited to the most basic functionality. Windows server > eventually also needs scripts for things that should be included (like > for example to tell whether DFS-R is currently in sync or not), but > the level where this requirement starts is higher. And it is much > easier to find the right commands and required options, because there > is much better documentation. > > sorry to disappoint you > Klaus >-- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba