[Samba] Wiki should have Readme First
schulz at adi.com
Wed Mar 12 18:08:09 MDT 2014
> Quoting"Justin Clacherty" <justin at redfish.com.au>
>>> From: Klaus Hartnegg [mailto:hartnegg at gmx.de]
>>> On 13.03.2014 00:23, Justin Clacherty wrote:
>>> > Yes, why is this necessary? I know it has been a recommendation (that
>>> > is liberally ignored) on Windows servers since inception but I had
>>> > thought this was more a performance thing.
>>> In the case of Samba4 the main issue is not performance, it's
>>> From what I read on the mailing list, the smbd that gets started by samba
>>> behaves differently from when it's started separately as file
>>> server. The one
>>> started by samba is only for SYSVOL and lacks several features. Also nmbd
>>> does not work together well with the samba daemon. The result is that many
>>> file sharing things first seem to work fine, but there are
>>> scenarios in which
>>> this causes problems.
>From my reading, as of Samba 4.1.5, the smbd is no longer different.
>>> I don't know the details, and would welcome others to jump in and fill in
>>> these gaps.
>>> Maybe the text should be put somewhere on a wiki without immediately
>>> linking to it from the main page, so it can first be improved.
>> Thanks Klaus. I've just been searching back through the list and
>> have seen Andrew mention that it's predominantly a philosophical
>> reason rather than a technical one. So for a small office that
>> really only needs one server an all-in-one approach is fine, but if
>> you're going to have several servers anyway you'd ideally have two
>> AD servers and separate file servers.
There is one technical reason that I know of. For an AD style DC, the nmbd
daemon is not run. So browsing will not be available. If you force nmbd
to run along with the samba daemon, they will both try to perform some
of the same functions with bad ressults.
> In case Klaus is right (I cannot judge..) I wonder whether the "one
> machine advice" should be:
> "To run a SME server (directory service and file server on the same
> box) it is recommended to run a NT style domain."
I am not sure that running a NT style domain can be recommended.
> Or is this wrong?
Applied Dynamics Intl.
schulz at adi.com
More information about the samba