Hi,

The first link appears to only allow for failover at the server side =
for samba. Heartbeat is OpenSourcethat does this for multiple platforms. =
While this is A Good Thing, the issue is one of state vis-=E0-vis the =
client's connection(s).

The second link appears (or I missed something) to only discuss NFS.

As can be read in the Samba documentation, SMB/CIFS state is what =
prevents truly seamless and transparent failover. While Heartbeat will =
function excellently to provide HA for multiple samba servers, =
in-progress client connections will be hosed, and there appears to be no =
easy way around this, as it is inherent in the protocol.

HTH,
-C
=20

> -----Original Message-----
> From: samba-bounces+cbarry=3Dsilverstorm.com@lists.samba.org=2 0
> [mailto:samba-bounces+cbarry=3Dsilverstorm.com@lists.samba.org]=20
> On Behalf Of Arc C.
> Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2006 10:38 PM
> To: samba@lists.samba.org
> Subject: RE: [Samba] Samba 4 Clustering
>=20
> As far as I know, Sun Cluster 3.1 can natively cluster=20
> (fail-over) Samba
> 3.x
> http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/819-1081
>=20
> Of course this is only available for Solaris (sparc or X86).
>=20
> Another this can be done with Veritas Cluster Server (Solaris=20
> is for sure, but
> I think Linux is also supported) with Application agent, as=20
> described here
>=20
> http://ftp.support.veritas.com/pub/s...cts/ClusterSer
> ver_UNIX/275710.
> pdf
>=20
> Is that what the question was?
>=20
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: samba-bounces+achapkis=3Ddls.net@lists.samba.org=20
> > [mailto:samba-bounces+achapkis=3Ddls.net@lists.samba.org] On=20
> > Behalf Of Jeremy Allison
> > Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 5:23 PM
> > To: Abhijith Das
> > Cc: samba@lists.samba.org
> > Subject: Re: [Samba] Samba 4 Clustering
> >=20
> > On Fri, Mar 17, 2006 at 05:14:44PM -0600, Abhijith Das wrote:
> > > Hi List,
> > > From what I've read in many mailing lists, Samba 3 is not truly=20
> > > clusterable.
> > >=20
> > > From what I understand, people have been able to cluster=20

> Samba with=20
> > > varying levels of success. Transparent failover and=20

> > active-active file=20
> > > serving ( 2 or more smbs serving the same files (through=20

> a cluster=20
> > > filesystem like GFS) from multiple cluster nodes=20

> > simultaneously ) are=20
> > > two things that are not possible with the current Samba. Or=20

> > are there=20
> > > more issues as well?
> > >=20
> > > There were discussions however, that mentioned clustering=20

> > being scoped=20
> > > into Samba 4. Can somebody elaborate on clustering support=20

> > in Samba 4?
> >=20
> > Samba3 has been made cluster aware by SGI via the work of=20
> > James Peach (on the Samba Team). James has posted his changes=20
> > and we're in the process of evaluating them for future=20
> > integration. Volker is particularly active in this area at=20

> the moment.
> >=20
> > Jeremy.
> > --
> > To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
> > instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
> >=20

>=20
> --=20
> To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
> instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
>=20

--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba