Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Samba 4.0 released

samba.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 73 posts

Re: Samba 4.0 released

#41

Post by cryptomilk »

rufugee wrote: post #36
sk5t wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If getting AD Domain Services off of Windows will actually avoid the need to buy any Windows Server CALs, then it certainly makes the proposition more interesting. But, this presumes that nearly all the other services (file sharing, http, etc.) are also not Windows.

We use Windows Server for three things: 1. Directory services/DC 2. Windows file shares 3. Exchange I have to buy user CALs for #1 and #2. One CAL gives me the right to connect that user to any of our file shares and to AD. IIRC, that cost when we last purchased was around $50/user. We also have to buy a separate CAL for Exchange. I would love to replace AD and our Windows file shares with Samba 4, provided that it w…

For 3. you should take a look at OpenChange. It implements Exchange using Samba 4.0 libraries.

Re: Samba 4.0 released

#42

Post by cryptomilk »

Osmium wrote: post #13

Any news on if Samba 4.0 is still single-threaded? (the page isn't loading for me) I recently wanted to use Samba, but was limited by performance on a low-end dual core processor: it'd max out one core, and be unable to use the other. I'm sure they have (or have had) good reasons for not doing this, but with so many low-power multicore processors out there now it seems a shame...

Samba has a flexible process model so you can choose what you want: forking, preforking, threading (bad) or a single (for debuging) process model.

Re: Samba 4.0 released

#43

Post by vy8vWJlco »

jmspring wrote: post #9
vy8vWJlco wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Never underestimate the power of "free, as in cheap." :)

"free, as in cheap" does not apply in the case of an existing infrastructure with staff already trained on using the deployed (AD) system.

Not immediately, but the thing that people can set up and try and say "yeah, sure, problem solved" has a funny way of making it's way into the rack. Whether it does or doesn't in a specific case usually just comes down to whether the one supporting it likes Vi, Emacs, or Word.

Re: Samba 4.0 released

#44

Post by fleitz »

josemariaruiz wrote: post #6
dsr_ wrote: post #3

There are few people running Windows AD who are going to view this as their next step, largely because they've already become used to running those Windows boxes. For groups who aren't fully invested in AD, or need compatibility with those who are, this is a major win.

Microsoft AD is the ONLY reason many companies (Apple shops included) have Microsoft servers. People cannot imagine how disruptive is a fully operational Samba 4.0 AD for Microsoft. (like a fully operational space station with a planet destroying laser :p)

If you can offer AD as a service you could setup a tidy business, otherwise not very many people are going to look at this.

Small companies don't have the expertise, large companies can't afford the risk.

Re: Samba 4.0 released

#45

Post by JoshTriplett »

tptacek wrote: post #19
sk5t wrote: post #18

As probably one of the more AD-focused participants on HN, I have to approach this with a good dose of skepticism w.r.t. large companies adopting Samba for complex AD environments. AD + DFSN + (DFSR|NTFRS) + LDAP + SSL + RPC + NTP + GPO + CIFS + NTFS + SDDL + WMI + ADWS + etc., is an extremely complex set of stuff to implement, and the cost of supporting a third-party version could, IMHO, easily dwarf the cost of a f…

... and if you have enough control over your environment to replace Windows Server as a domain controller, why would you be using the AD stack to begin with?

Just like many existing development companies have Windows-based infrastructure with both Windows and Linux on end-user systems, it makes sense to have Linux-based infrastructure while still supporting Windows end-user systems.

Linux support for AD also allows incremental migration of this infrastructure.

Re: Samba 4.0 released

#46

Post by jeltz »

dbrian wrote: post #38
rufugee wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not the cost of a few domain controllers...it's the $50-60/user cost of client access license (CALS). I have 2500 users...that's quite a pricey (approx. $62K) system for directory services. I personally am going to give Samba 4 a look.

If it costs 1 more sysadmin to support it, then it isn't worth it.

If it potentially could save licensing costs of about one sysadmin it is worth looking at. It is unlikely (but possible) an entire additional sysadmin will need to be employed just to support Samba.

Re: Samba 4.0 released

#47

Post by rufugee »

cryptomilk wrote: post #41
rufugee wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We use Windows Server for three things: 1. Directory services/DC 2. Windows file shares 3. Exchange I have to buy user CALs for #1 and #2. One CAL gives me the right to connect that user to any of our file shares and to AD. IIRC, that cost when we last purchased was around $50/user. We also have to buy a separate CAL for Exchange. I would love to replace AD and our Windows file shares with Samba 4, provided that it w…

For 3. you should take a look at OpenChange. It implements Exchange using Samba 4.0 libraries.

Do you know of any success stories with OpenChange? Thanks for the info.

Re: Samba 4.0 released

#48

Post by rufugee »

jeltz wrote: post #46
dbrian wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it costs 1 more sysadmin to support it, then it isn't worth it.

If it potentially could save licensing costs of about one sysadmin it is worth looking at. It is unlikely (but possible) an entire additional sysadmin will need to be employed just to support Samba.

Agreed. We currently have to keep a Windows admin on staff (who actually costs a lot more than the CALs) just to manage our shares, Exchange, and file servers. It'd be nice to get these final pieces of the Windows puzzle out of our environment and staff solely Linux admins.

But I do agree with the dbrain's sentiment. If it was going to have a significantly higher TCO, I wouldn't do it.

Re: Samba 4.0 released

#49

Post by sbuk »

sk5t wrote: post #33
rufugee wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not the cost of a few domain controllers...it's the $50-60/user cost of client access license (CALS). I have 2500 users...that's quite a pricey (approx. $62K) system for directory services. I personally am going to give Samba 4 a look.

If getting AD Domain Services off of Windows will actually avoid the need to buy any Windows Server CALs, then it certainly makes the proposition more interesting. But, this presumes that nearly all the other services (file sharing, http, etc.) are also not Windows.

I have to say that Microsoft convincing businesses that they need to pay to connect to servers that they've already paid for is a shear piece of economic genius. Morally abject, but still brilliant financially none the less.

Re: Samba 4.0 released

#50

Post by rbanffy »

bennysaurus wrote: post #27
axusgrad wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How are the GUIs for Samba 4.0 AD features? I usually prefer nice configuration files, but the Windows Server features were very easy to learn. Another nice thing about Windows Server, updates are "free" after a high up-front cost.

The windows ones apparently work with this version of Samba.

I bet the next patch Tuesday will solve that.
Post reply on HN