Hi John
On 4/11/24 15:55, John Mulligan wrote:
I haven't done much perf testing myself, as I usually get by with a "few vms
on a laptop" approach. There may be some opportunities to run things in the
ceph sepia lab but I would have to ask around first as I typically only use it
to run
On Thursday, April 11, 2024 9:35:28 AM EDT Ralph Boehme wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> I've finally came around to finish the database client driver for Samba
> to talk to Ceph via Python librados and implement some changes that do
> improve performance compared to the one from Samuel I used last year:
Hi John,
I've finally came around to finish the database client driver for Samba
to talk to Ceph via Python librados and implement some changes that do
improve performance compared to the one from Samuel I used last year:
=Gel9elLSEsQ
It's at 2:44
Regards,
Bailey
> -Original Message-
> From: Alexander E. Patrakov
> Sent: March 28, 2024 3:13 AM
> To: Angelo Hongens
> Cc: ceph-users@ceph.io
> Subject: [ceph-users] Re: Call for Interest: Managed SMB Protocol Support
>
> On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 a
On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 9:17 AM Angelo Hongens wrote:
> According to 45drives, saving the CTDB lock file in CephFS is a bad idea
Could you please share a link to their page that says this?
--
Alexander E. Patrakov
___
ceph-users mailing list --
Yes, I'd love this!
A lot of companies want samba for simple file access from windows/mac
clients. I know quite some companies that buy netapp as 'easy smb storage'.
Having ceph do built-in (or bolt-on) samba instead of having to manage
external samba clusters would be nice, and would make
On Tuesday, March 26, 2024 10:53:29 PM EDT David Yang wrote:
> This is great, we are currently using the smb protocol heavily to
> export kernel-mounted cephfs.
> But I encountered a problem. When there are many smb clients
> enumerating or listing the same directory, the smb server will
>
This is great, we are currently using the smb protocol heavily to
export kernel-mounted cephfs.
But I encountered a problem. When there are many smb clients
enumerating or listing the same directory, the smb server will
experience high load, and the smb process will become D state.
This problem
On Monday, March 25, 2024 3:22:26 PM EDT Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 11:01 PM John Mulligan
>
> wrote:
> > On Friday, March 22, 2024 2:56:22 PM EDT Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
> > > Hi John,
> > >
> > > > A few major features we have planned include:
> > > > *
On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 11:01 PM John Mulligan
wrote:
>
> On Friday, March 22, 2024 2:56:22 PM EDT Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
> > Hi John,
> >
> > > A few major features we have planned include:
> > > * Standalone servers (internally defined users/groups)
> >
> > No concerns here
> >
> > > *
On Monday, March 25, 2024 1:46:26 PM EDT Ralph Boehme wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> On 3/21/24 20:12, John Mulligan wrote:
>
> > I'd like to formally let the wider community know of some work I've been
> > involved with for a while now: adding Managed SMB Protocol Support to
> > Ceph.
SMB being the
Hi John,
On 3/21/24 20:12, John Mulligan wrote:
I'd like to formally let the wider community know of some work I've been
involved with for a while now: adding Managed SMB Protocol Support to Ceph.
SMB being the well known network file protocol native to Windows systems and
supported by MacOS
On Friday, March 22, 2024 2:56:22 PM EDT Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> > A few major features we have planned include:
> > * Standalone servers (internally defined users/groups)
>
> No concerns here
>
> > * Active Directory Domain Member Servers
>
> In the second case, what is
Hi,
On 3/22/24 19:56, Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
In fact, I am quite skeptical, because, at least in my experience,
every customer's SAMBA configuration as a domain member is a unique
snowflake, and cephadm would need an ability to specify arbitrary UID
mapping configuration to match what
Hi John,
> A few major features we have planned include:
> * Standalone servers (internally defined users/groups)
No concerns here
> * Active Directory Domain Member Servers
In the second case, what is the plan regarding UID mapping? Is NFS
coexistence planned, or a concurrent mount of the same
I think this is fantastic. Looking forward to the sambaxp talk too!
CephFS + SMB is something we make use of very much of, and have had a lot of
success working with. It is nice to see it getting some more integration.
Regards,
Bailey
> -Original Message-
> From: John Mulligan
>
16 matches
Mail list logo
