similar to: Linking mdbox directories

On 09/04/18 16:49, Vincent Royer wrote: > > > Is a flash-backed Raid required for JBOD, and should it be 1gb, 2, > or 4gb flash? > > RAID and JBOD are completely different things. JBODs are just that, bunches of disks, and they don't have any cache above them in hardware. If you're going to use ZFS under Gluster, look at the ZFS docs first. Short answer is no.

On 09/04/18 19:02, Vincent Royer wrote: > Thanks, > > I suppose what I'm trying to gain is some clarity on what choice is > best for a given application.? How do I know if it's better for me to > use a raid card or not, to include flash-cache on it or not, to use > ZFS or not, when combined with a small number of SSDs in Replica 3. > > How few is "small

Hi Alex, Nice information about forest type. Regarding listing domain users, have you tried to set up samba with: winbind use default domain = no? 2016-07-11 19:50 GMT+02:00 Alex Crow <acrow at integrafin.co.uk>: > > > On 11/07/16 13:55, Alex Crow wrote: > > Hi List, > > > > I am currently testing inter-forest trusts between a pair of AD > > domains.

Hi Timo, Is it OK to have dovecot variables in entries in an LDAP userdb? Say I wanted to set the mail userdb parameter to override mail_location, would it work by having an entry in LDAP (eg for mailMessageStore attrib) like: mdbox:/home/email/%d/%n:INDEX=/home/indexes/%d/%1n/%n:ALT=/home/email_archive/%d/%1n/%n and those % variables will still be expanded by dovecot? Or would I be required

Are you replacing or merging the policies? > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- > Van: samba [mailto:samba-bounces at lists.samba.org] Namens Alex Crow via > samba > Verzonden: maandag 19 december 2016 15:29 > Aan: samba at lists.samba.org > Onderwerp: Re: [Samba] GPO Security Filtering "Access Denied" > > > > On 19/12/16 14:18, L.P.H. van Belle via

Hi list, Very strange problem here on Samba 4.5.2 DCs. We have set up some GPOs and they seem to work fine, however we need to apply some Security Filtering to a couple of them. We can add groups and users until we reach 6 groups/users/computers in the list box in GPO management. As soon as we try to add a 7th entry, GPO Management throws an "Access Denied" error. Even odder is

Hi List, I am currently testing inter-forest trusts between a pair of AD domains. All DCs and member servers are using Sernet Samba 4.4.5. I have set up conditional forwarding in by Bind setup (I'm using BIND9_DLZ) and all machines can resolve each other. On the DCs, I can see users from the other side of the trust using wbinfo -u --domain=<other domain>. In addition if I set up ID

Hi List, As the subject states, I'm running a CTDB cluster. Samba is Sernet 4.4.5 in an NT-Style Samba domain (DCs are Centos 6 packaged samba, 3.6.22) Every so often, users are unable to connect to network shares. Most of the problems seem to happen on Windows 7 domain members, but smbclient will also fail to connect. I see these lines in the logs for every attempted connection:

On 21/10/16 10:52, Ralph Böhme wrote: > On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 10:30:46AM +0100, Alex Crow via samba wrote: >> Interestingly I have a setup here for testing for rollout of S4 AD. The file >> servers are in an AD domain and are running Sernet 4.4.5, so one version >> older than production. > maybe it's related to bug 12005 that was fixed in 4.4.6? Can you test > with

There's nothing wrong with that path. If your DNS is working, you should be able to connect to \\foo, which is your AD domain. It will just pick one of your DCs instead of a static one. Alex On 06/02/17 14:36, basti via samba wrote: > > samba-tool gpo listall > showes also wrong path in gpo > > > On 06.02.2017 15:21, basti via samba wrote: >> When I do an gpupdate

On 12/8/2016 5:16 AM, Alex Crow via samba wrote: > > > On 07/12/16 16:23, L.P.H. van Belle via samba wrote: >> Just check, yes all my pc's ( dhcp and static ) are owner of the DNS >> records. >> >> NTDOM\COMPUTERNAME$ is set on the record and every pc its own record. >> >> ! one thing, i do use Bind9_dlz with samba and not internal DNS. >> I

>> You don't have smbd/smbstatus installed from a package in /usr/ and the >> other left over in /usr/local/, or similar? In that case, they could >> be getting their configurations from different places... >> >> peace & happiness, >> martin > Hi Martin, > > No, nothing like that. Installing the Sernet packages obsoletes the > distro ones.

On 19/12/16 17:57, Miguel medalha wrote: >>> No, I don't, because this is a loopback and I only want certain >>> users on these computers to have the screensaver and lock disabled. If I did that it would apply to everyone. > No, it wouldn't apply to everyone. As of April this year, according to Microsoft, all policies must have "Authenticated Users" with

On 03/07/16 13:06, Volker Lendecke wrote: > On Fri, Jul 01, 2016 at 10:00:21AM +0100, Alex Crow wrote: >> We've had a strange issue after following the recommendations at >> https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Ping_pong, particularly the part >> about mmap coherence. We are running CTDB/Samba over a MooseFS >> clustered FS, and we'd not done the ping-pong before.

On 22/09/16 12:12, Rowland Penny via samba wrote: > On Thu, 22 Sep 2016 10:58:18 +0100 > Alex Crow via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > >> Hi List, >> >> As the subject states, I'm running a CTDB cluster. Samba is Sernet >> 4.4.5 in an NT-Style Samba domain (DCs are Centos 6 packaged samba, >> 3.6.22) >> >> Every so often, users

On 17/11/16 19:48, Rowland Penny via samba wrote: > If you are running Samba as an AD DC or domain member, then you > shouldn't be using 'valid' & 'invalid' any more. As for creating > users etc, samba-tool comes with help, try running 'samba-tool --help' > > If you have more questions, please feel free to ask ;-) > > Rowland > What? Really?

On 03/07/16 21:47, Volker Lendecke wrote: > On Sun, Jul 03, 2016 at 08:42:36PM +0100, Alex Crow wrote: >> I've only put the "private dir" onto MooseFS, as instructed in the CTDB >> docs. > Can you quote these docs, so that we can correct them? > > Also Gluster have the same tip here:

>> Not sure what's going on with the rest of it. Doing a bit of testing... > I tested on a 3 node test cluster, with 4.4.x and master, works as > expected. > > -slow > Hi there, Can you send your smb.conf so I can compare it to mine? Cheers, Alex -- This message is intended only for the addressee and may contain confidential information. Unless you are that person,

Thanks, I suppose what I'm trying to gain is some clarity on what choice is best for a given application. How do I know if it's better for me to use a raid card or not, to include flash-cache on it or not, to use ZFS or not, when combined with a small number of SSDs in Replica 3. On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 10:49 AM, Alex Crow <acrow at integrafin.co.uk> wrote: > On 09/04/18

On 04/11/16 07:12, Volker Lendecke wrote: > On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 09:21:46PM +0000, Alex Crow via samba wrote: >> [root at zalma ~]# stat testfile >> ... >> Size: 1286700 Blocks: 2514 IO Block: 65536 regular file >> Device: 29h/41d Inode: 35820037 Links: 1 >> Access: (0774/-rwxrwxr--) Uid: ( 3535/ jh3) Gid: ( 513/Domain Users)