On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 03:03:24PM +0100, Marcello Romani wrote:
>>>>> "Marcello" == Marcello Romani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Marcello> Eric Boehm ha scritto:
>> I am being asked to determine the feasibility of serving
>> hundreds (300-400) of directories as individual shares instead
>> of sharing a single parent directory.
Marcello> Hi, I found some docs about this smb.conf parameter:
Marcello> usershare max shares
Marcello> which specifies the maximum number of shares that the
Marcello> samba admin will allow non-root users to create via the
Marcello> command
Marcello> net usershare add
Marcello> ( read for example
Marcello> http://us1.samba.org/samba/docs/man/manpages-3/net.8.html
Marcello> )
Yes, I saw that but it wasn't much comfort. We don't have users
creating shares in our environment but I understand your reasoning.
I have a suspicion that the limit was set to a large value on the
premise it would be unlikely that users would ever create that many
shares.
Marcello> The example value given in the docs for the usershare
Marcello> max shares parameter is 100, which makes me think that a
Marcello> samba server should cope with a number of shares in the
Marcello> hundreds.
Marcello> I know it's not much, but I HTH nonetheless.
My primary concern is the the number of clients connections would
increase dramatically.
If I have 50 clients with one connection (one share) now, that's 50
connections.
This could increase to 300*50 connections. Granted, not every client
will be active on every share at the same time but I could easily see
that I could go from 1 to 10 connections per client.
I am interested in knowing or at least estimating how Samba might
perform under these conditions.
--
Eric M. Boehm /"\ ASCII Ribbon Campaign
[EMAIL PROTECTED] \ / No HTML or RTF in mail
X No proprietary word-processing
Respect Open Standards / \ files in mail
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
