Todor Fassl wrote:
From: "Cain, Marc"
e user's profile folder location (though in the case of Active
Directory --
delivering additional GroupPolicy behaviors). The client's copy of
Windows
is doing the roaming work and it's behavior is determined by local Group
Policy settings.
Oh, that'
-with-samba-emc-servers-nas-devices.aspx
or just ask him to search as follows:
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=RoundUpWriteTimeOnSync
and he'll be convinced.
On 28 June 2012 21:08, Todor Fassl wrote:
> From: "Ben Metcalfe"
> To:
> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 2:24 PM
We are just now making the switch from XP to Win7. I understand that XP
and Win7 profiles are not compatible. If we have to have our Windows
users (and there aren't that many) create new profiles, maybe I can make
sure they get created with full folder redirection implemented. Even
if we have t
From: "Ben Metcalfe"
To:
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 2:24 PM
Subject: Re: [Samba] speed of samba vs Windows
On 28 June 2012 20:15, Ben Metcalfe wrote:
"That's the point. I am
pushing the idea that our problem is not using folder redirection and the
Windows guy is p
From: "Robert Heller"
the heck is windows.com? If its Microsoft, why isn't the default time
server
time.microsoft.com?]
dig time.windows.com =>
;; ANSWER SECTION:
time.windows.com. 3482IN CNAME time.microsoft.akadns.net.
time.microsoft.akadns.net. 158 IN A 65.55.2
At Thu, 28 Jun 2012 13:46:07 -0500 "Todor Fassl" wrote:
>
> > is it possible that unix file timestamps having a greater precision
> > than ntfs is causing windows to see a "change"? I know rsync has an
> > option to combat this.
>
>
> Well, I have no reason to believe that our Windows guy is
...and apologies for doing the "reply to sender/reply to list" thing as
well. :)
On 28 June 2012 20:15, Ben Metcalfe wrote:
> "That's the point. I am
> pushing the idea that our problem is not using folder redirection and the
> Windows guy is pushing the idea that its samba itself."
>
> Spot-on.
"That's the point. I am
pushing the idea that our problem is not using folder redirection and the
Windows guy is pushing the idea that its samba itself."
Spot-on.
Your windows guy just needs to implement a few AD registry tweaks (see
below etc) to get things working sweetly, and folder redirection
From: "Cain, Marc"
e user's profile folder location (though in the case of Active Directory --
delivering additional GroupPolicy behaviors). The client's copy of Windows
is doing the roaming work and it's behavior is determined by local Group
Policy settings.
Oh, that's a really good point. Even
is it possible that unix file timestamps having a greater precision
than ntfs is causing windows to see a "change"? I know rsync has an
option to combat this.
--
Well, I have no reason to believe that our Windows guy is correct and that
Windows downloads only changed files and samba downloads t
On Jun 28, 2012, at 7:02 AM, Todor Fassl wrote:
> Is there any reason to believe that a samba server would be slower when
> serving up roaming profiles than a real Windows server? I know roaming
> profiles are slow by nature and that there are things you can do to help like
> configuring ffold
On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 10:19 AM, Dave Ewart wrote:
> On Thursday, 28.06.2012 at 11:07 -0400, Steve Thompson wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 28 Jun 2012, Todor Fassl wrote:
>> >Our Windows guy insists samba is slow but I don't believe it. He
>> >claims that when you load a roamng profile, Windows downloads o
On Thursday, 28.06.2012 at 11:07 -0400, Steve Thompson wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Jun 2012, Todor Fassl wrote:
>
> >Is there any reason to believe that a samba server would be slower
> >when serving up roaming profiles than a real Windows server?
>
> In my experience, Samba is much faster than Windows
> -Original Message-
> From: samba-boun...@lists.samba.org
> [mailto:samba-boun...@lists.samba.org] On Behalf Of Steve Thompson
> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 11:07 AM
> To: Todor Fassl
> Cc: samba@lists.samba.org
> Subject: Re: [Samba] speed of samba vs Windows
>
On Thu, 28 Jun 2012, Todor Fassl wrote:
Is there any reason to believe that a samba server would be slower when
serving up roaming profiles than a real Windows server?
In my experience, Samba is much faster than Windows on comparable
hardware. From 3 to 5 times faster, depending on function.
Is there any reason to believe that a samba server would be slower when
serving up roaming profiles than a real Windows server? I know roaming
profiles are slow by nature and that there are things you can do to help
like configuring ffolder redirection. But all else being equal, how would a
sam
16 matches
Mail list logo
