similar to: Re: Samba vs. Windows : significant difference intimestamp handling?

>> > > ... On my PCs the mtime remains unmodified. >> > > It's a weird thing if it happens under normal >> > > circumstances ... But if it only happens when >> > > you fake the identity from within the Office >> > > programs, well, I wouldn't bother really. >> > > >> > I totally agree ! >> >>

|> mtime being changed is beyond the pale. I suspect |> ext3 is the problem. I heard some people losing all |> of their data on ext3-formatted disks. Stay away |> from it. | | Do you have some facts to back up that load of FUD? | By all accounts I've ever seen, Ext. 3 has been | stable for *long* time before it was even included | in the stock Kernel tree. Do you want to

>>>> Fine. Use reiserfs and don't worry about ctime. >>>> >>> But reiserfs doesn´t support ACLs. Does it? >> >> Oh yes, it does. Big way. >> > ?? > > I was under the impression that if i wanted acls, i > should use xfs, ext3 (or jsf i believe) but NOT > reisersf. > > Am I wrong? Does (for example) SuSE 8.2 with >

|> Do you want to say that nobody ever lost any data on |> ext3-formatted disks? Be realistic. |> |> But does it warrant my exhortation to stay away from |> it? Probably not. It was a joke without a smiley |> sign. ext3 is probably a solid, though a bit clumsy |> and slow fs. |> |> I appreciate your criticism. I jumped the same way |> when someone else used the same

Hi I plan to set up a big file server, something like motherboard with 4 ide ports and an additional 4 ide daughter card, a PIV proc and 512 or 1024 MB ram, a 100 or 1000 MB NIC, with 6 or 7 200 GB ide HDDs in a sigle box. I don't need lightning performance, just disk space. Of course this would be served by some linux os and samba questions (relative to samba configuration and behaviour) :

Hi there, I have been trying to set up Samba 2.2.8 to connect to our Windows 2000 domain, and provide shares that support file permissions as a Win2K box would, under Red Hat 8.0. To that end I recompiled the kernel (2.4.20) with patches from acl.bestbits.org, enabling ext2 and ext3 EA and ACL support. I set up winbind, joined the domain OK, and got name resolution working pretty well. Everything

PDC: Samba 2.2.8a on linux 2.4.20 + XFS + ACL, rather normal configuration. Client: Win XP Pro When user logon to Domain, I can see him (smbstatus, utmpx). But when he logoff, the record is still there. It disappears when I reboot the XP. According to M$ knowledge-base the problem is that samba doesn't handle the logoff correctly. Do you have any solution of this? -- Honza Houstek

We are looking at implementing a Linux box running samba in the near future with about 1TB of disk online. The purpose of this box will be for basic file and printer sharing needs. I am doing research on the different journaling file systems avaible in RH 7.3 and up (ext3, reiserFS, and JFS) and was wondering if anyone has had any real world experience with them (mostly reiserFS and JFS) and

I am currently running a Windows XP system at home with around 100+ Mb in use over ~400Mb of NTFS file systems. I am installing CentOS 4.4 on it when I change out the mobo/cpu/mem/video combo I just bought. I want to convert all the file systems to (probably) Reiserfs or maybe ext3, but I need to do them one at a time because I only have enough transfer space to accommodate the largest one, or

XFS is the best filesystem. David Weinehall wrote: >On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 03:33:13PM -0700, Dax Kelson wrote: > > >>On Tue, 2004-03-02 at 09:34, Peter Nelson wrote: >> >> >>>Hans Reiser wrote: >>> >>>I'm confused as to why performing a benchmark out of cache as opposed to >>>on disk would hurt performance? >>>

I have really strange problem. I create a subdirectory in s directory with ALCs and default ACLs. The new subdirectory geins rwx permitions for ACL_GROUP_OBJ (Full Access for CREATOR GROUP in NT security dialog box). Any combination of parameters like (force) create mask, security mask etc. doesn't help as well as inherit acls or inherit permitions. I tried versions 2.2.7b, 2.2.8 and 2.2.8a

thanks very much for your kind and fast assistance! greetings from holland. mourik jan > -----Original Message----- > From: Dragan Krnic [mailto:dkrnic@lycos.com] > Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2003 11:19 > To: mourik jan c heupink > Cc: samba@lists.samba.org > Subject: Re: Samba vs. Windows : significant difference in > timestamphandling? > > > > and (now that

> and (now that i have your attention... :)) what > software do you use to backup your reisersf/acls > partitions? Excellent question. I use tar, but before I start it I do a "getfacl --skip-base -R ." and save the output in a file that is bound to be the first on tape. When I restore such a tarball I do "setfacl --restore=" and all the ACLs are restored in a fell

Hi! Are these results i got from my benchmarking "normal" or is there something strange happening in my system? This box is going to be a mailserver, so i tested various fs to decide on which i should utilize. I personally dislike reiserfs because it has proven somehow unreliable on our servers (although it got better in the more recent kernels), ext3 would be quite good (fsck'ing

Dear Listmembers, I try to work with samba (newest rpm for SuSE, 3.0.1.pre2, but that does not matter, the effect was there in 2.2.7 and 2.2.8a too) on an sufficient armed system (the system does not matter either, I have tried it on different machines) using ReiserFS (version 3.6.4-12). When accessing one share from one machine (i.e. copying two or more files at a time to or from the share)

I am unable to boot Dom0 on a machine with Reiser file systems. Reiser support is built into the xen0 kernel. I have similar setup with ext3 file systems working just fine, so I don''t think it is a setup problem. I have tried booting with and without and initrd file, booting with the original Linux distro initrd file, etc, but nothing seems to work. I recall seeing a thread about ReiserFS

Hi! I was just wondering how Ext3 and Reiserfs compare. When I reinstalled my server (because of a stupid hacker) I took the opportunity to change to ReiserFS. And I have to say it's really much faster than Ext3. I don't have benchmarks, but for example, stuff like "make dep" on the linux kernel is much faster (even though I had enabled write cache when I was using ext3). So

I really hope someone has a clue on this one.... :) I've got a 2.2TB array mounted on a 3ware 9500 controller. I installed it last week ensuring that LBA was enabled and using gpt with parted to get the full size available on one array. I also think I chose reiserfs for the array. We then moved ALOT of data to the array. Problem now is that after a reboot LBA doesn't seem to be in

hi This is Tarun from Indusa Global , Jamaica pl. reply regards -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: tarun.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 180 bytes Desc: Card for tarun kumar Url : http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/attachments/19990727/506b9d4c/tarun.vcf

Hi, Here'a a question - is it possible to compile a single module (distributed in the kernel source tree) for the current CentOS kernel (2.6.9-5.0.5) without recompiling the entire kernel and all other modules. I basically need reiserfs3 (nb. why is it disabled? it's a module, you use it, it doesn't wreck anything...) and I don't really want to change the rest of the kernel, and