[Samba] Active/Passive Samba Cluster for Shared NFS Backend
Volker.Lendecke at SerNet.DE
Thu Sep 18 10:17:36 MDT 2014
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 09:17:50AM -0500, Andrew Martin wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Volker Lendecke" <Volker.Lendecke at SerNet.DE>
> > To: "Andrew Martin" <amartin at xes-inc.com>
> > Cc: samba at lists.samba.org
> > Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2014 6:32:52 AM
> > Subject: Re: [Samba] Active/Passive Samba Cluster for Shared NFS Backend
> > On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 01:57:42PM -0500, Andrew Martin wrote:
> > > * are there any other problems with this configuration?
> > The only question I have is: Why? You should install Samba (Or the Ontap
> > CIFS option for that matter) on the NFS server, that's a single point
> > of failure anyway.
> The NFS serve doesn't support integration with AD, so it cannot
> authenticate Windows users to access the CIFS shares. Thus, I need to use
> some type of gateway server that can support authenticating with AD via
Well, installing Samba on the NFS server will be no
different than on an NFS client in any manner. Samba
communicates numerid unix IDs to the kernel, just as the NFS
client will do.
> Is it possible to do what I've described without needing to use CTDB
> and a clustering filesystem?
No. "lock directory" on NFS just won't work. If you need
both smbds running for faster failover, make it local. Put
the "private directory" on a proper cluster file system, NFS
just is not up to the task to serve tdb files. That's the
entire reason why ctdb exists.
SerNet GmbH, Bahnhofsallee 1b, 37081 Göttingen
phone: +49-551-370000-0, fax: +49-551-370000-9
AG Göttingen, HRB 2816, GF: Dr. Johannes Loxen
http://www.sernet.de, mailto:kontakt at sernet.de
More information about the samba