[Samba] samba 3.0 as DC and fileserver?

[Stefan G. Weichinger]

Alexander Lazarevich wrote 11. November 2003 22:49:

AL> My question is this: is there anything bad about combining samba as a
AL> domain controller and samba as a fileserver?

There is nothing bad about this AFAIK. Using Samba is good ;-)

AL> Or should we have a samba DC
AL> on one system, and the samba fileserver on a different system? I'm leaning
AL> towards seperating the two systems, but I'd like a more concrete reason to
AL> do so than a feeling.

Basically (and this is no Samba-related stuff) separating services
between hosts does help in performance- and tracking-issues.

You wonŽt have to look at your fileserver when searching for a
DC-related issue, for example.

On the other hand you get two
hosts/nics/controllers/kernels/patches/.../problems/... to maintain if you decide
to use two machines.

AL> Any tips or ideas? Does samba 3.0 as a domain controller need a lot of
AL> /etc/init.d/smb -stop and -starts? If so, then I don't want to put that on
AL> our fileserver.

I donŽt know that exactly, because I still donŽt operate a Samba-PDC in
production-environments, but I donŽt think that the smbd-daemon has to
be restarted all the time in normal DC-mode.

This would hurt basic UNIX/Linux-principles, as far as I understand them.

daemons are intended to run all the time.

Just restart them when you change something really important.

And smbd reads smb.conf every minute so why should it be
stopped/started all the time?

I think it depends on the size (number of clients/workstations) of
your network.

regards,
Stefan G. Weichinger
mailto:monitor at oops.co.at