[Samba] ODP: Primary DC migration / upgrade

[Norbert Hanke]

Hi,

I/O on the Rapberry Pi is as bad or good as the SD card used for
storage. Look here for useful benchmarks: https://pibenchmarks.com/fastsd/ .

With the RPi 3 you can expect approx. 8 MB/s random read and 4 MB/s
random write with SanDisk SD cards; with the RPi 4 it's around 11 MB/s
random read and 5 MB/s random write with Kingston SD cards.
That's "terrible" compared to a contemporary SSD but for a Domain
Controller with no too many users it works fine.

You can speed up the RPi 4 by having an SSD on its USB 3 port... makes
it 10 times as fast, you could even boot from it but the latter is
sometimes tricky to make it work.

regards,
Norbert


On 07.12.2021 18:08, Patrick Goetz via samba wrote:
>
>
> On 12/7/21 11:00, Rowland Penny via samba wrote:
>> On Tue, 2021-12-07 at 16:37 +0000, Krzysztof Kucybała wrote:
>>> Thanks for the reply,
>>> I considered Rasberry Pi, but I want this box to also keep a backup
>>> hdd that will rsync from a NAS box that I have that runs network
>>> shares among lots of other things (the primary dc VM as well which is
>>> a bit problematic).
>>
>> A Samba AD DC (like a normal Windows AD DC) should only be used for
>> authentication, but it isn't unknown for one to be used for other
>> purposes.
>>
>>>   Gearing a Pi4b to do that will cost me a fair bit more than the
>>> simplest AMD SoC mobo with a few required gizmos, and arguably it
>>> will be less customizable.
>>
>> Are you sure about that ? You can get an rpi4, case, power supply and
>> ssd for circa £150.
>>
>
> What I've read is that I/O on the raspberry Pi is terrible, but if the
> directory fits entirely into RAM, I guess this isn't much of an issue.
> I see only upsides to always running an AD-DC in a linux container,
> regardless of what hardware you use. Filesystem-independent snapshots
> are a very useful feature, and this makes it trivial to migrate your
> DC from one hardware platform to another. And in this case using the
> hardware for other purposes is expected.
>
>
>>>
>>> So You're saying there'd be no harm keeping the VM aside but pointing
>>> all members at the physical box as primary destination?
>>
>> There would be no problem with using a VM as another DC (though I would
>> update the OS and Samba) and you could point your clients to both for
>> DNS.
>>
>> Rowland
>>
>>>
>>
>>
>