flanque
asked on
RedHat 9 Replacement with 2.6.x Kernel
Hi,
A quick easy question (I hope).
We are currently using RH9 with Samba 2.2.7a-8.9.0 and kernel 2.4.20-31.9.
I am impressed by the benchmarking of the new 2.6.x kernel with repect to file access. Given that RedHat has ceased a free 'enterprise' OS, what the replacements so to speak, that have support for the 2.6.x kernel and that are known to be friendly with Samba 3.x?
A quick easy question (I hope).
We are currently using RH9 with Samba 2.2.7a-8.9.0 and kernel 2.4.20-31.9.
I am impressed by the benchmarking of the new 2.6.x kernel with repect to file access. Given that RedHat has ceased a free 'enterprise' OS, what the replacements so to speak, that have support for the 2.6.x kernel and that are known to be friendly with Samba 3.x?
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
ASKER
Hi jlevie,
Yeah I did consider that, however I know my managers and it would be a hard sell, as they see Linux as "free".
Especially when the current RH9 install (with updates) "works" in most respects.
Yeah I did consider that, however I know my managers and it would be a hard sell, as they see Linux as "free".
Especially when the current RH9 install (with updates) "works" in most respects.
With standard ext3 file system you can give a file read, write and execute permissions for the user, group and owner.
This means that within a particular share you normally have to end up forcing a particular group and permissions when writing files.
On Windows servers within a share you can set particular permissions to give sets of groups and individuals certain permissions and these are automatically inhereted if subdirectories are created for example.
The XFS file system supports Posix ACL's where you can give files and folders multiple group and user permissions which are inhereted. These are still limited to readm write and execute but this system is still a very big advantage over standard ext3.
This means that within a particular share you normally have to end up forcing a particular group and permissions when writing files.
On Windows servers within a share you can set particular permissions to give sets of groups and individuals certain permissions and these are automatically inhereted if subdirectories are created for example.
The XFS file system supports Posix ACL's where you can give files and folders multiple group and user permissions which are inhereted. These are still limited to readm write and execute but this system is still a very big advantage over standard ext3.
At work we've just about completed the process of upgrading all of our "traditional, free" RedHat systems to RHEL. Partly for support issues, but mostly for performance reasons. Included in those upgrades was a Samba server with something like 1.5Tb of storage that experiences the highest I/O loads I've ever seen on a Samba server. Where RH 9 was just barely coping RHEL isn't even sweating. And on a direct comparison of a MailScanner load test system (same hardware, just a change in OS) RHEL was a measured 20% faster.
Out experience has been that upgrading to RHEL is like replacing the system with a faster box, which is a lot cheaper than a hardware upgrade.
Out experience has been that upgrading to RHEL is like replacing the system with a faster box, which is a lot cheaper than a hardware upgrade.
ASKER