Linux NAS or Server 2003 R2 File server

[jonathan.lees]

Help,
Currently all my users data sits on a single PDC, I just purchased a new server which I will use purely as a fileserver. I can't make my mind up whether to use Windows Server 2003 R2 that can do quotas on shares or have an open source NAS using either freenas or openfiler. Can anyone tell me what the benefit would be in using the NAS solution?

thanks

[CyberNerd]

samba is faster. VFS allows you to do things like recycle (undelete for students), file auditswithout paying for addons. you can also 'veto' certain filetypes such as .exe very easily. samba VFS also does quotas.

[Geoff]

Plus you don't have to worry about licensing.

[jonathan.lees]

How would Samba work my Active Directory users accounts and home folder NTFS permissions?

[alonebfg]

I would use as linux box as 2003 r2 has capability to sort linux shares out. I have not looked into it that much but have a look here. http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserv...p/default.mspx
If you can manage shares it would be really good I Know you can quota on openfiler even if you cant intergrate 2003 r2. and it is free.

[Geoff]

Well with openfiler it'll work just like a member server. It'll pick up all your domain users and groups fine. Also, assuming you use a file system that supports extended ACLs, you can assign permissions just like you can on NTFS file systems. You get shadow copies and quotas too.

[jonathan.lees]

thanks for that, maybe I should ask the same question in the Windows section!

[itgeek]

If your server has wss on which I have it works really well because it works with backup exec 11d remote agent and dont have to backup cifs shares this would be quite hard to setup. Windows storage server does not have all the services etc that server 2003 r2 has.

[Theblacksheep]

I Know you can quota on openfiler even if you cant intergrate 2003 r2. and it is free.

R2 cannot be installed on any RM CC3 servers, according to RM its not an upgrade .

However R2 is as standard on new CC4 servers.