[Gluster-users] Need help making a decision choosing MS DFS or Gluster+SAMBA+CTDB

[David]

Thanks everyone.

So from reading all your comments, I understand that if I need an active /
active synchronized setup for higher workloads, Gluster is for me.
Other then that, DFS-R is a good option for data replication at the expanse
of latency of the replicated data to the secondary node, and only one
server is active per CIFS share.

Does DFS-R works well on high rate of changes?
Found from other users use cases that DFS-R caused server hangs and such,
hope it was fixed in Win2K12 server.

David


On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Daniel Müller <mueller at tropenklinik.de>
wrote:

> An example of a working share on samba4:
>
> You can choose to work with vfs objects= glusterfs
> Glusterfs:volume=yourvolume
> Glusterfs:volfile.server=Your.server
> Form e it turned out to be too buggy.
>
>
> I just used instead the path=/path/toyour/mountedgluster
>
> You will need this:
> posix locking =NO
> kernel share modes = No
>
>  [edv]
> comment=edv s4master verzeichnis auf gluster node1
> vfs objects= recycle
> ##vfs objects= recycle, glusterfs
> recycle:repository= /%P/Papierkorb
> ##glusterfs:volume= sambacluster
> ##glusterfs:volfile_server = XXX.XXXX.XXXX
> recycle:exclude = *.tmp,*.temp,*.log,*.ldb,*.TMP,?~$*,~$*,Thumbs.db
> recycle:keeptree = Yes
> recycle:exclude_dir = .Papierkorb,Papierkorb,tmp,temp,profile,.profile
> recycle:touch_mtime = yes
> recycle:versions = Yes
> recycle:minsize = 1
> msdfs root=yes
> path=/mnt/glusterfs/ads/wingroup/edv
> read only=no
> posix locking =NO
> kernel share modes = No
> access based share enum=yes
> hide unreadable=yes
> hide unwriteable files=yes
> veto files = Thumbs.db
> delete veto files = yes
>
> Greetings
> Daniel
>
>
> EDV Daniel Müller
>
> Leitung EDV
> Tropenklinik Paul-Lechler-Krankenhaus
> Paul-Lechler-Str. 24
> 72076 Tübingen
> Tel.: 07071/206-463, Fax: 07071/206-499
> eMail: mueller at tropenklinik.de
> Internet: www.tropenklinik.de
>
>
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: gluster-users-bounces at gluster.org
> [mailto:gluster-users-bounces at gluster.org] Im Auftrag von Dan Mons
> Gesendet: Montag, 10. August 2015 09:08
> An: Mathieu Chateau
> Cc: gluster-users; David
> Betreff: Re: [Gluster-users] Need help making a decision choosing MS DFS or
> Gluster+SAMBA+CTDB
>
> If you're looking at a Gluster+Samba setup of any description for people
> extensively using Microsoft Office tools (either Windows or Mac clients), I
> *strongly* suggested exhaustive testing of Microsoft Word and Excel.
>
> I've yet to find a way to make these work 100% on Gluster.  Strange
> client-side locking behaviour with these tools often make documents
> completely unusable when hosted off Gluster.   We host our large
> production files (VFX industry) off Gluster, however have a separate
> Windows
> Server VM purely for administration to host their legacy Microsoft Office
> documents (we've since migrated largely to Google Apps + Google Drive for
> that stuff, but the legacy requirement remains for a handful of users).
>
> -Dan
>
> ----------------
> Dan Mons - R&D Sysadmin
> Cutting Edge
> http://cuttingedge.com.au
>
>
> On 10 August 2015 at 15:42, Mathieu Chateau <mathieu.chateau at lotp.fr>
> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > what do you mean by "true" clustering ?
> > We can do a Windows Failover cluster (1 virtual ip, 1 virtual name),
> > but this mean using a shared storage like SAN.
> >
> > Then it depends on your network topology. If you have multiple
> > geographical sites / datacenter, then DFS-R behave a lot better than
> > Gluster in replicated mode. Users won't notice any latency, At the
> > price that replication is async.
> >
> >
> > Cordialement,
> > Mathieu CHATEAU
> > http://www.lotp.fr
> >
> > 2015-08-10 7:26 GMT+02:00 Ira Cooper <ira at redhat.com>:
> >>
> >> Mathieu Chateau <mathieu.chateau at lotp.fr> writes:
> >>
> >> > I do have DFS-R in production, that replaced sometimes netapp ones.
> >> > But no similar workload as my current GFS.
> >> >
> >> > In active/active, the most common issue is file changed on both
> >> > side (no global lock) Will users access same content from linux &
> >> > windows ?
> >>
> >> If you want to go active/active.  I'd recommend Samba + CTDB + Gluster.
> >>
> >> You want true clustering, and a system that can handle the locking etc.
> >>
> >> I'd layer normal DFS to do "namespace" control, and to help with
> >> handling failover, or just use round robin DNS.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> -Ira
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Gluster-users mailing list
> > Gluster-users at gluster.org
> > http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
> _______________________________________________
> Gluster-users mailing list
> Gluster-users at gluster.org
> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20150810/a77776b4/attachment.html>