[Samba] speed of samba vs Windows

Ben Metcalfe bwmetcalfe at gmail.com
Thu Jun 28 13:15:21 MDT 2012

"That's the point. I am
pushing the idea that our problem is not using folder redirection and the
Windows guy is pushing the idea that its samba itself."

Your windows guy just needs to implement a few AD registry tweaks (see
below etc) to get things working sweetly, and folder redirection (to
MS-Server or samba/linux) is considered to be best-practice in every
microsoft house I've ever come across. No-one uses roaming profiles without
it, unless all their workstations are wired with 10GB ethernet to the most
over-spec'd server I've ever seen, or their users don't actually roam more
than once every six months...

On 28 June 2012 20:09, Ben Metcalfe <bwmetcalfe at gmail.com> wrote:

> Here's a decent summary of roaming profiles on the latest windows
> iterations.
> http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/hh848267
> "Branche cache" may also be relevant:
> http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/hh831696
> WIthout the original windows admin here to query its difficult to be sure,
> but he might well have been talking about having "offline files" enabled on
> redirected folders attached to roaming profiles, which will display an
> rsync-like behaviour when reconnected.
> "Offline files" works on my illumos-based ZFS/samba NAS (the last time I
> checked) indistinguishably from the way it does against microsoft smb
> shares though, so I can't see any reason why it shouldn't work on linux
> samba... or maybe I'm not testing it rigourously.
> http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/b/springboard/archive/2010/04/19/understanding-user-state-virtualization-improvements-in-windows-7.aspx
> Here's an old (but still applicable?) HOWTO for enabling Vista's specific
> "offline files" efficiently against samba/linux:
> http://blogs.technet.com/b/filecab/archive/2007/03/16/using-offline-files-with-samba-emc-servers-nas-devices.aspx
> YMMV on Windows 7 and 8.
> On 28 June 2012 16:26, Chris Weiss <cweiss at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 10:19 AM, Dave Ewart <davee at ceu.ox.ac.uk> wrote:
>> > On Thursday, 28.06.2012 at 11:07 -0400, Steve Thompson wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Thu, 28 Jun 2012, Todor Fassl wrote:
>> >> >Our Windows guy insists samba is slow but I don't believe it.  He
>> >> >claims that when you load a roamng profile, Windows downloads only
>> >> >files that have changed and samba downloads everything. But he
>> >> >doesn't know anything about samba and I don't know where he got that
>> >> >from.
>> >
>> > However native speed won't be important if, under Samba, a full roaming
>> > profile is downloaded on each login whereas under Windows an rsync-like
>> > action takes place to only download minimal changes.  I don't know
>> > whether that's the case or not, whether it's configurable behaviour
>> > under either Samba or Windows Server, but it's certainly an interesting
>> > point.
>> is it possible that unix file timestamps having a greater precision
>> than ntfs is causing windows to see a "change"?  I know rsync has an
>> option to combat this.
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
>> instructions:  https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba

More information about the samba mailing list