Samba Success in the Enterprise?

gunnk asks: "We've deployed a Samba server here to replace some aging Novell Netware boxes. It works great: fast, secure, stable. However, we have one VIP that feels that Samba is 'amateur' software and that we should be buying Windows servers. I've been searching with little success for large Samba deployments in Enterprise environments. Anyone out there care to share stories of places that are happily running large Samba installations for their file servers? Or not so happy, for that matter — better to be informed!"

Has your VIP ever heard of a little company...

[thewiz]

called Google?

Probably not.

sounds like your vp is an amateur!

[guysmilee]

sounds like your vp is an amateur and should be replaced with 'anyone' else!

Samba is A-OK!

[dave420]

Ever since it started to talk to Active Directory domain servers, it was perfect for the office. Before that it was great, but lacked the key feature to allow it to get accepted properly.

Just ask Novell......

[Lxy]

We've deployed a Samba server here to replace some aging Novell Netware boxes

So at some point, this VIP probably trusted Novell. Since Novell is putting all it's effort into OES linux (which ships with Samba, not to mention employed Jeremy Allison for awhile), I bet they'd have an opinion on the subject.

It just works.

[CDarklock]

Samba is every bit as good as anything else for running a file server, and if you're setting your file servers up correctly, nobody will know or care what they're running. They either work or they don't.

I would still recommend that you use Windows, because I'm at Microsoft. We like people to use Windows. You should use Windows more often. You should install it on everything. I'd be happy to explain how you could do the same things you already do with more Windows licenses. But it's sort of your job to think about what's best for your company, not ours.

Samba running fine here

[div_2n]

While we aren't a huge environment (50 - 75 PCs), Samba is working great for us. Running Samba 3.0.22 on Ubuntu. I've integrated authentication into our Active Directory environment (native 2003) complete with ACLs. Although it is worth pointing out that there is a very distinct difference in ACLs on Samba (POSIX ACLs) vs Windows ACLs if you are used to Windows 2000 and beyond permissions. I won't tell the whole story here, but make sure to read Samba documentation on the subject if you don't already know. The short short version is that POSIX ACLs offer a much simpler set of permissions of rwx where Windows breaks out several others. This usually isn't a big deal.

Configuring all of the proper settings on shares can be cumbersome if you have quite a few. If you require some quick and easy GUI to do everything, Swat is a favorite. Centeris also makes a product that looks promising.

Keep your eye on Samba 4. It will allow you to replace your Windows Active Directory servers. All in all, I'd have to say your VIP calling Samba amateur software shows either ignorance of reality or negative bias towards Samba.

Re:Fuck him

[LWATCDR]

Not a chance... No one ever got fired for buying IBM I mean Microsoft.
They are the standard and the largest software company in the world so their stuff has to work. If it fails it was because IT messed up.

This post has nothing to do with facts, just reality.
And not they are not the same thing.

Re:Even better

[mrsbrisby]

Just say:

``That's why IBM and Google are big and profitable. Because they aren't run by you.''

It'll either get you fired or promoted. I wouldn't want to work for that asshole either- no halfway decent manager is ever going to make you waste time and money challenging heresay.

Re:SAMBA + Windows 2003 Server is shit

[Jeremy Allison - Sam]

You're still asking for your pony without
telling anyone where it will live.

Samba maps Windows semantics to POSIX.
There are some semantics you simply
can't map onto POSIX - the Windows
access time / create time semantics
for example, so we simply can't
provide these. Some POSIX semantics
are flexible enough we can layer
Windows on top (locking for example).

Until the kernel gets NFSv4 ACLs
that mean NT style ACLs can be understood
there anything Samba does on top of
this will not map into anything meaningful.

There are inherent limitations in POSIX
that mean we can't do this - yet. Luckily
for us the UNIX/Linux standards are being
extended so we can revisit it when they
do.

Jeremy.