[Samba] AD file server

Andrew Bartlett abartlet at samba.org
Fri Sep 14 05:37:14 MDT 2012

On Thu, 2012-09-13 at 21:31 +0100, ray klassen wrote:
> OK i'm intrigued. I've been watching the various beta pages on the wiki for Samba 4 since it went beta and I still don't quite get something 
> "Samba 4.0 beta ships with two distinct file servers.  We now use the 
> file server from the Samba 3.x series 'smbd' for all file serving by
> default. 
> Samba 4.0 also ships with the 'NTVFS' file server.  This file 
> server is what was used in all previous alpha releases of Samba 4.0, and is
> tuned to match the requirements of an AD domain controller. "
> Does this mean that if you want to use a samba 4.0 host as a domain controller you must use the NTVFS file server?

No.  What is means (and I'm happy to clarify the language) is that we
have two file servers, and they have different strengths.  The ntvfs
server did us incredibly well for its role handling sysvol for the AD
DC, but the new default is the implementation of the team's desire to
have and develop only one file server (based on smbd) in the long term. 

We are releasing rc1 because we are happy that we have finished the
integration such that new installations (in particular) shouldn't need
to use anything other than the default.

>  And therefore if you have a Samba 3.x domain controller that is also
> functioning as a file server, it's advisable to migrate the domain
> controller functionality to another machine as part of the upgrade?

I suggest that, but not for the reason of using the ntvfs file server. 

Separating this allows you to upgrade the two components separately when
you need to, and avoids some quirks from the internal winbind
implementation in the DC that some folks have found troublesome.  

Andrew Bartlett

Andrew Bartlett                                http://samba.org/~abartlet/
Authentication Developer, Samba Team           http://samba.org

More information about the samba mailing list