[Samba] Wiki should have Readme First

Andrew Bartlett abartlet at samba.org
Fri Mar 14 15:23:07 MDT 2014

On Thu, 2014-03-13 at 15:01 +0100, Simon Schneider wrote:
> Just to get this straight: Apart from the problem with browsing (which will
> be solved with samba 4.2?) and things like redundancy, server load etc.,
> from a technical standpoint it is perfectly OK to run Samba 4 AD +
> Fileserver with the same samba instance?
> We're a small "company" and cannot afford running two server just for
> authentication vs file serving, both would be doing nothing most of the
> time, yet virtualization would kill us probably with not enough memory
> problems, so can you give a definite yes or no?

It will be fine.  Just as long as you understand why we recommend
against it, it will do that task perfectly well.  That much has been
written and repeated often, so I won't say it again.  (The funny thing
is that, in some areas it will do 'better', because it runs by default
in a mode that perfectly preserves windows ACLs, because that it
required for AD DC operation on sysvol and netlogon). 

I hope we haven't scared you and others too much, but we want to
emphasise good network architecture as well. 

Andrew Bartlett

Andrew Bartlett                       http://samba.org/~abartlet/
Authentication Developer, Samba Team  http://samba.org
Samba Developer, Catalyst IT          http://catalyst.net.nz/services/samba

More information about the samba mailing list