search for: onef

Hi, We are in the process of testing a migration of our current setup which contains Samba 4 as Classic DC with LDAP backend, Isilon OneFS bulk storage serving NFS/SMB shares and Windows/Mac/Linux clients to a more modern Samba 4 AD. We need to migrate to Samba AD because of Windows 10 and macos 10.13.x (and for several other reasons). But we run into an issue with authenticating the clients in the Isilon OneFS system using Samba...

I am wondering if anyone has any experience with the Isilon OneFS storage system (http://www.isilon.com/) using NFS to host storage for Dovecot. Thanks

...erved by Samba 4.2.x > > (using > > Samba and LDAP) and want to move to Windows AD. > > The reason we need to do that is because of the clients (Windows 10 > > and MacOS) and because of a third party device which does not want > > to > > talk to Samba AD (Isilon OneFS). > > Possibly if Isilon would accept that Samba AD works in the same way > as > Windows AD, it might be made to work. > > In one of their PDF's is this: > > Active Directory with RFC 2307 and Windows Services for UNIX > A best practice is to use Microsoft Active...

...cond AD dc for the sake of tests (using Fedora just for the newer samba + bind packages). After fiddling around it eventually started working and kept the connectivity for about 30-40 min. At that point suddenly it dropped it again. One thing I noticed is that changing any of the AD settings in the OneFS management page instantly get the connection back for another 30 min. I know, it may look as OneFS issue, but since Samba is involved as well I decided to reach for some help or pointers for debugging this.

Hi, we now have an old Windows NT4.0 domain served by Samba 4.2.x (using Samba and LDAP) and want to move to Windows AD. The reason we need to do that is because of the clients (Windows 10 and MacOS) and because of a third party device which does not want to talk to Samba AD (Isilon OneFS). I did a 'classicupgrade' to Samba AD from our Samba/LDAP config and then I use this guide : https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Joining_a_Windows_Server_2008_/_2008_R2_DC_to_a_Samba_AD to add the Windows 2008R2 DC to the Samba AD. This all worked out but I encountered an error on the Wind...

...e now have an old Windows NT4.0 domain served by Samba 4.2.x (using > Samba and LDAP) and want to move to Windows AD. > The reason we need to do that is because of the clients (Windows 10 > and MacOS) and because of a third party device which does not want to > talk to Samba AD (Isilon OneFS). Possibly if Isilon would accept that Samba AD works in the same way as Windows AD, it might be made to work. In one of their PDF's is this: Active Directory with RFC 2307 and Windows Services for UNIX A best practice is to use Microsoft Active Directory with Windows Services for UNIX and...

...LACE_BROKEN_CHECKS: END LIBREPLACE_NETWORK_CHECKS: START bge2 IP=xxx.xx.xx.xx NETMASK=255.255.255.0 bge1 IP= xxx.xx.xx.xx NETMASK=255.255.255.0 bge0 IP= xxx.xx.xx.xx NETMASK=255.255.255.0 lo0 IP=127.0.0.1 NETMASK=255.0.0.0 LIBREPLACE_NETWORK_CHECKS: END checking for Isilon OneFS... no Package talloc was not found in the pkg-config search path. Perhaps you should add the directory containing `talloc.pc' to the PKG_CONFIG_PATH environment variable No package 'talloc' found Package tdb was not found in the pkg-config search path. Perhaps you should add the direct...

...that front is about the read locks. Is it worth trying dotlock for it instead of fcntl? If that's not the problem, then could we be running into some system limitations or a bug in the kernel or mailbox storage? The server running dovecot is Centos 6.10. The mailbox storage is on Isilon OneFS 8.1.2.0. I should probably increase dovecot's logging to see if anything else jumps out at me. thank you for any suggestions. Tom Lieuallen Oregon State Univesity

.. it would be great if btrfs could be expended about abilities that OneFS file system has (FS by Isilon) .. there is ceph open source clustered/distributed storage system that is using btrfs, maybe work with those people would be a good start http://ceph.newdream.net/about/ http://ceph.newdream.net/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe lin...

...d indexes are on NFS (v3,tcp) mail_nfs_storage = yes lock_method = fcntl [didn't touch the following] # Mail index files also exist in NFS. Setting this to yes requires # mmap_disable=yes and fsync_disable=no. mail_nfs_index = yes served by an Isilon s200 node (OneFS 6.5.5.22) procmail delivers in the same location through postfix-2.8.7 The filer shows *a lot* of such messages : 2013-08-02T14:12:29+02:00 <0.5> XXXX-10(id10) /boot/kernel.amd64/kernel: [lkf_delegate.c:2752](pid 46390="kt: dwt3")(tid=101282) dev_local_lkf_unlock(): no lock ent...

....h... no checking for library containing backtrace_symbols... no checking for backtrace_symbols... no checking for trace_back_stack in -lexc... no checking for sysctlbyname... no checking gpfs_gpl.h usability... no checking gpfs_gpl.h presence... no checking for gpfs_gpl.h... no checking for Isilon OneFS... no checking for libunwind... no checking for _dup... yes checking for _dup2... yes checking for _opendir... yes checking for _readdir... yes checking for _seekdir... yes checking for _telldir... yes checking for _closedir... yes checking for __dup... no checking for __dup2... no checking for __...

....h... no checking for library containing backtrace_symbols... no checking for backtrace_symbols... no checking for trace_back_stack in -lexc... no checking for sysctlbyname... no checking gpfs_gpl.h usability... no checking gpfs_gpl.h presence... no checking for gpfs_gpl.h... no checking for Isilon OneFS... no checking for libunwind... no checking for _dup... no checking for _dup2... no checking for _opendir... no checking for _readdir... yes checking for _seekdir... no checking for _telldir... no checking for _closedir... no checking for __dup... no checking for __dup2... no checking for __opendi...

...none required checking for backtrace_symbols... yes checking for trace_back_stack in -lexc... no checking for sysctlbyname... no checking for /proc/sys/kernel/core_pattern... yes checking gpfs_gpl.h usability... no checking gpfs_gpl.h presence... no checking for gpfs_gpl.h... no checking for Isilon OneFS... no checking for libunwind... no checking for _dup... no checking for _dup2... no checking for _opendir... no checking for _readdir... no checking for _seekdir... no checking for _telldir... no checking for _closedir... no checking for __dup... no checking for __dup2... yes checking for __opendi...

Hi, I am looking to utilize LLVM as the backend in an existing compiler for a garbage collected language, and have a question regarding the current and future support for precise GC in LLVM. It appears that gc.root is being phased out, with with breaking changes such as this: http://reviews.llvm.org/D7004 <http://reviews.llvm.org/D7004> Does this mean that gc.statepoint is ready for