ML
    • Recent
    • Categories
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Register
    • Login

    Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved News
    synologysynology dsmsynology dsm 6.1samba 4sambaactive directorynas
    20 Posts 6 Posters 8.3k Views
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • scottalanmillerS
      scottalanmiller @travisdh1
      last edited by

      @travisdh1 said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

      Hrm, fast-clone. Probably time to try out a Btrfs based file server at home.

      It's good stuff.

      travisdh1T 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
      • travisdh1T
        travisdh1 @scottalanmiller
        last edited by

        @scottalanmiller said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

        @travisdh1 said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

        Hrm, fast-clone. Probably time to try out a Btrfs based file server at home.

        It's good stuff.

        Yeah, I know brtfs is the way to go, I just haven't tried it out yet myself. Starting out on IRIX with XFS back in the day makes me a too nostalgic.

        scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • scottalanmillerS
          scottalanmiller @travisdh1
          last edited by

          @travisdh1 said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

          @scottalanmiller said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

          @travisdh1 said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

          Hrm, fast-clone. Probably time to try out a Btrfs based file server at home.

          It's good stuff.

          Yeah, I know brtfs is the way to go, I just haven't tried it out yet myself. Starting out on IRIX with XFS back in the day makes me a too nostalgic.

          I still use XFS for everything.

          travisdh1T 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • travisdh1T
            travisdh1 @scottalanmiller
            last edited by

            @scottalanmiller said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

            @travisdh1 said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

            @scottalanmiller said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

            @travisdh1 said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

            Hrm, fast-clone. Probably time to try out a Btrfs based file server at home.

            It's good stuff.

            Yeah, I know brtfs is the way to go, I just haven't tried it out yet myself. Starting out on IRIX with XFS back in the day makes me a too nostalgic.

            I still use XFS for everything.

            When will be the right time to switch to btrfs then? We know it's been stable for long enough that it's becoming the default in a number of distributions now, but has it really been battle tested well enough yet?

            Also, should we maybe make another thread for the btrfs discussion?

            scottalanmillerS brianlittlejohnB JaredBuschJ 3 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • scottalanmillerS
              scottalanmiller @travisdh1
              last edited by

              @travisdh1 said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

              @scottalanmiller said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

              @travisdh1 said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

              @scottalanmiller said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

              @travisdh1 said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

              Hrm, fast-clone. Probably time to try out a Btrfs based file server at home.

              It's good stuff.

              Yeah, I know brtfs is the way to go, I just haven't tried it out yet myself. Starting out on IRIX with XFS back in the day makes me a too nostalgic.

              I still use XFS for everything.

              When will be the right time to switch to btrfs then? We know it's been stable for long enough that it's becoming the default in a number of distributions now, but has it really been battle tested well enough yet?

              Also, should we maybe make another thread for the btrfs discussion?

              Another thread is good. The basics though are that like ZFS it is usually best for special cases. XFS for normal systems. The features of BtrFS don't matter for normal systems.

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • brianlittlejohnB
                brianlittlejohn @travisdh1
                last edited by

                @travisdh1 said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

                @scottalanmiller said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

                @travisdh1 said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

                @scottalanmiller said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

                @travisdh1 said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

                Hrm, fast-clone. Probably time to try out a Btrfs based file server at home.

                It's good stuff.

                Yeah, I know brtfs is the way to go, I just haven't tried it out yet myself. Starting out on IRIX with XFS back in the day makes me a too nostalgic.

                I still use XFS for everything.

                Also, should we maybe make another thread for the btrfs discussion?

                I think the rule is, when in doubt, make a new thread.

                scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                • scottalanmillerS
                  scottalanmiller @brianlittlejohn
                  last edited by

                  @brianlittlejohn said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

                  @travisdh1 said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

                  @scottalanmiller said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

                  @travisdh1 said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

                  @scottalanmiller said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

                  @travisdh1 said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

                  Hrm, fast-clone. Probably time to try out a Btrfs based file server at home.

                  It's good stuff.

                  Yeah, I know brtfs is the way to go, I just haven't tried it out yet myself. Starting out on IRIX with XFS back in the day makes me a too nostalgic.

                  I still use XFS for everything.

                  Also, should we maybe make another thread for the btrfs discussion?

                  I think the rule is, when in doubt, make a new thread.

                  That's a good rule if it doesn't exist already.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • JaredBuschJ
                    JaredBusch @travisdh1
                    last edited by

                    @travisdh1 said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

                    @scottalanmiller said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

                    @travisdh1 said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

                    @scottalanmiller said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

                    @travisdh1 said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

                    Hrm, fast-clone. Probably time to try out a Btrfs based file server at home.

                    It's good stuff.

                    Yeah, I know brtfs is the way to go, I just haven't tried it out yet myself. Starting out on IRIX with XFS back in the day makes me a too nostalgic.

                    I still use XFS for everything.

                    When will be the right time to switch to btrfs then? We know it's been stable for long enough that it's becoming the default in a number of distributions now, but has it really been battle tested well enough yet?

                    Also, should we maybe make another thread for the btrfs discussion?

                    The answer here is you do not switch. You install a distro letting it do its native thing by default and less you have an over arcing huge reason to override defaults. So you will get this when you install a new system that now has it as a default.

                    scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • scottalanmillerS
                      scottalanmiller @JaredBusch
                      last edited by

                      @JaredBusch said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

                      @travisdh1 said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

                      @scottalanmiller said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

                      @travisdh1 said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

                      @scottalanmiller said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

                      @travisdh1 said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

                      Hrm, fast-clone. Probably time to try out a Btrfs based file server at home.

                      It's good stuff.

                      Yeah, I know brtfs is the way to go, I just haven't tried it out yet myself. Starting out on IRIX with XFS back in the day makes me a too nostalgic.

                      I still use XFS for everything.

                      When will be the right time to switch to btrfs then? We know it's been stable for long enough that it's becoming the default in a number of distributions now, but has it really been battle tested well enough yet?

                      Also, should we maybe make another thread for the btrfs discussion?

                      The answer here is you do not switch. You install a distro letting it do its native thing by default and less you have an over arcing huge reason to override defaults. So you will get this when you install a new system that now has it as a default.

                      openSuse, for example, has had it as default for two years.

                      Really though, I prefer XFS for anything that isn't a storage machine. VMs need something mature, stable and light. XFS does that well.

                      JaredBuschJ 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • JaredBuschJ
                        JaredBusch @scottalanmiller
                        last edited by

                        @scottalanmiller said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

                        @JaredBusch said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

                        @travisdh1 said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

                        @scottalanmiller said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

                        @travisdh1 said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

                        @scottalanmiller said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

                        @travisdh1 said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

                        Hrm, fast-clone. Probably time to try out a Btrfs based file server at home.

                        It's good stuff.

                        Yeah, I know brtfs is the way to go, I just haven't tried it out yet myself. Starting out on IRIX with XFS back in the day makes me a too nostalgic.

                        I still use XFS for everything.

                        When will be the right time to switch to btrfs then? We know it's been stable for long enough that it's becoming the default in a number of distributions now, but has it really been battle tested well enough yet?

                        Also, should we maybe make another thread for the btrfs discussion?

                        The answer here is you do not switch. You install a distro letting it do its native thing by default and less you have an over arcing huge reason to override defaults. So you will get this when you install a new system that now has it as a default.

                        openSuse, for example, has had it as default for two years.

                        Really though, I prefer XFS for anything that isn't a storage machine. VMs need something mature, stable and light. XFS does that well.

                        But does your preference mean that you will override a default installs choice just because that is your preference?

                        Using anything but default should have very clear reasons because the first time somebody besides you have to troubleshoot it there will be big problems.

                        scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • ObsolesceO
                          Obsolesce
                          last edited by

                          Its like comparing ReFS to NTFS. You should always use NTFS unless you have specific reasons to use ReFS. One example is using ReFS on a VM storage only volume... it will only be holding .vhdx files.

                          Maybe that's not the best example because you can't use ReFS some places... but I think enough to get my point across.

                          scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                          • scottalanmillerS
                            scottalanmiller @Obsolesce
                            last edited by

                            @Tim_G said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

                            Its like comparing ReFS to NTFS. You should always use NTFS unless you have specific reasons to use ReFS. One example is using ReFS on a VM storage only volume... it will only be holding .vhdx files.

                            Maybe that's not the best example because you can't use ReFS some places... but I think enough to get my point across.

                            That's a good comparison, I think. BtrFS is really good for building a large scale NAS or SAN device where software RAID is needed. But for normal stuff, like ZFS, it's just lots of unnecessary overhead.

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • scottalanmillerS
                              scottalanmiller @JaredBusch
                              last edited by

                              @JaredBusch said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

                              @scottalanmiller said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

                              @JaredBusch said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

                              @travisdh1 said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

                              @scottalanmiller said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

                              @travisdh1 said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

                              @scottalanmiller said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

                              @travisdh1 said in Synology DSM 6.1 Released with Active Directory Server:

                              Hrm, fast-clone. Probably time to try out a Btrfs based file server at home.

                              It's good stuff.

                              Yeah, I know brtfs is the way to go, I just haven't tried it out yet myself. Starting out on IRIX with XFS back in the day makes me a too nostalgic.

                              I still use XFS for everything.

                              When will be the right time to switch to btrfs then? We know it's been stable for long enough that it's becoming the default in a number of distributions now, but has it really been battle tested well enough yet?

                              Also, should we maybe make another thread for the btrfs discussion?

                              The answer here is you do not switch. You install a distro letting it do its native thing by default and less you have an over arcing huge reason to override defaults. So you will get this when you install a new system that now has it as a default.

                              openSuse, for example, has had it as default for two years.

                              Really though, I prefer XFS for anything that isn't a storage machine. VMs need something mature, stable and light. XFS does that well.

                              But does your preference mean that you will override a default installs choice just because that is your preference?

                              Using anything but default should have very clear reasons because the first time somebody besides you have to troubleshoot it there will be big problems.

                              I would often, yes actually. XFS is not like an odd, unsupported option. It's just not the default. It's still completely core to openSuse's design. They simply had to pick which one they were going to use when someone did not choose one or the other and they opted for extra features over lean design for those that don't know which they want, which I think makes sense. Just like CentOS opts for the simplicity of using root for administration instead of sudo, but makes it super easy to enable sudo. It's not default, but it's fully supported. They just had to choose something as default.

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                              • 1 / 1
                              • First post
                                Last post