[Gluster-users] CIFS options - anyone done A-B comparisons on various setups?
whit.gluster at transpect.com
Wed Dec 5 01:02:19 UTC 2012
I claim nothing special in terms of Samba knowledge. Not even that this is
optimal in any dimension. All I can say is that none of my users have
complained about performance, in a situation where speed's not critical as
long as the overall system is dependable. But my current Samba conf, for a
CIFS share run from a third system exporting an NFS share via CIFS that
originates on Glusterfs (3.1.5) is:
workgroup = xyz
netbios name = abc
interfaces = eth1 192.168.1.250/24
encrypt passwords = true
wins server = 192.168.1.9
create mask = 0666
force create mode = 0666
directory mask = 0777
force directory mode = 0777
hosts allow = 192.168.1.
load printers = no
printing = none
printcap name = /dev/null
disable spoolss = yes
unix extensions = no
path = /path/to/nfsmountof/glusterfs
valid users = qwert yuiop
writeable = Yes
posix-locking = No
I recall having strong reasons to turn off unix extensions and
posix-locking, in terms of hitting errors otherwise. I should have kept
notes though, as that was long enough ago I don't remember the specifics.
What are you using as a Windows NFS client? I had the impression Windows
didn't have a good option there.
On Tue, Dec 04, 2012 at 11:06:45PM +0100, Gunnar wrote:
> Hi Whit,
> could you post your smb.conf? I'm currently a bit lost with a performance
> optimized setting for millions of small files accessed via a Samba share
> (local Gluster fuse mount). I would be glad to try out your approach and
> see how the results will be since a NFS access from Windows gives me a
> much better throughput than the Samba share.
More information about the Gluster-users