Jeremy Allison jra at samba.org
Tue Jun 24 12:05:08 MDT 2014

On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 07:07:26PM +1200, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> G'Day,
> Seeing what looks like a really interesting module in vfs_snap, and
> thinking about the trouble folks running btrfs and zfs have with Samba,
> having to run specific modules, I wondered if we should have a new,
> meta-module: vfs_auto
> That is:  We can detect almost as well as the system administrator what
> VFS modules they need for specific back-end file systems, and we hide so
> much of our correctness code behind optional, off by default modules.
> This is all OK if our users are NAS vendors and others who control the
> end environment, and so know to turn on modules, but what about everyone
> else?  Why shouldn't Samba 'just work' with a bare minimum of
> configuration?  Why should good features like streams support, snapshot
> creation, copy_chunk or full NT ACLs be hidden inside otherwise unknown
> modules?

Plus turning on Volker's threaded asyncIO code by default,
but that's just changing a default (aio read size, aio write size).
Maybe for 4.2 ?

More information about the samba-technical mailing list