Re: speed of samba vs Windows

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: samba-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:samba-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Steve Thompson
> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 11:07 AM
> To: Todor Fassl
> Cc: samba@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re:  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.

	Samba is also far more versatile and configurable than Windows

	For instance, built into Samba it's possible to configure a "Recycle
Bin" into each and every share. This is accomplished through adding a single
line to the share. To do that on Windows, it requires a registry hack, on
each workstation. Maybe that can be automated, but it doesn't have anything
to do with the server, it's all done on the workstation, forget to implement
the registry hack, then you forget about having a Recycle Bin on that share.

	I can't tell you how many times that Samba configuration has saved a
piece of critical data.

> > Our Windows guy insists samba is slow but I don't believe it.  He 
> > claims that when you load a roamng profile, Windows downloads only 
> > files that have changed and samba downloads everything. But 
> he doesn't 
> > know anything about samba and I don't know where he got that from.
> Indeed he doesn't know anything about Samba; he's wrong.
> Steve

  I concur.


To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the

[Linux]     [Info Cyrus]     [LARTC]     [Bugtraq]     [Netfilter]     [Internet Dating Forums]     [RAID]     [Yosemite News]     [Photography]

Add to Google Powered by Linux