[Samba] Active/Passive Samba Cluster for Shared NFS Backend

Andrew Martin amartin at xes-inc.com
Thu Sep 18 10:25:44 MDT 2014

----- 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 11:17:36 AM
> Subject: Re: [Samba] Active/Passive Samba Cluster for Shared NFS Backend
> > 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.
If I left the "private directory" on each local server, what would be the
consequence (just lost state information after a failover)? Would it be
safe to let smbd run on both servers at once (both with their own local
"private directory") with the understanding that all traffic would route
through the VIP? 

What would happen if traffic tried to access the share from both servers
at once if smbd was running on both simultaneously?

More information about the samba mailing list