In the larger scheme of things, "one smb server", "one nfs server" or "one cephfs MDS" doesn't differ much. You need some kind of box to translate from object storage (regardless of if this is iscsi, ceph or something else) to a kind of filesystem that can give you some extra guarantees (like being a POSIX filesystem) and keep state of locks and atomic ops so that more than one client-or-process can access the shared space without stepping on each others toes. Since there aren't (as far as I know) any native ceph access methods for windows, even a single windows client still need someone somewhere to translate the storage into a form usable by it. Den tors 13 feb. 2020 kl 10:03 skrev Lars Täuber <taeuber@xxxxxxx>: > I don't have samba experiences. Isn't the installation and administration > of a samba server just for one "share" overkill? > > > > Via smb, much discussed here > -- May the most significant bit of your life be positive. _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@xxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx
 |