Prev: Any hope for a Classic mode?
Next: Good News Mr 142.179.22.210 flood accessus.general
From: Jeepstone on 6 Dec 2007 04:59
We've just purchased a new Thecus U4500 NAS. The NAS can run numerous
filesystems including AFP. As we predominantly use Macs in the office
(we're a design studio) I've setup AFP and let the Macs connect using
that, and the remaining PC's in the office use their standard.

We used to suffer a lot from locked Mac files on our old Windows 2003
server, and a wealth of ._DS and ._filename files. If we are now using
AFP should I expect these problems to decrease? Is using AFP the best
way to connect?
From: Gregory Weston on 6 Dec 2007 06:54
In article
<e3b183ca-d27b-4467-8d67-08041168be09(a)e67g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>,
Jeepstone <pete.jones(a)room58.com> wrote:

> We've just purchased a new Thecus U4500 NAS. The NAS can run numerous
> filesystems including AFP. As we predominantly use Macs in the office
> (we're a design studio) I've setup AFP and let the Macs connect using
> that, and the remaining PC's in the office use their standard.
>
> We used to suffer a lot from locked Mac files on our old Windows 2003
> server, and a wealth of ._DS and ._filename files. If we are now using
> AFP should I expect these problems to decrease? Is using AFP the best
> way to connect?

The network file system in use is not likely to be a significant
contributor to the issue of locked files; that's likely an issue of the
specific server software. You won't see a change in the number of
..DS_Store files. You may or may not see a change in the appearance of
the metadata files (the ._filename ones). That depends on how the NAS is
storing the files it gets over AFP and how it shows them to clients
using other protocols.
From: Jeepstone on 6 Dec 2007 06:58
On Dec 6, 11:54 am, Gregory Weston <u...(a)splook.com> wrote:
> In article
> <e3b183ca-d27b-4467-8d67-08041168b...(a)e67g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>,
>
> Jeepstone <pete.jo...(a)room58.com> wrote:
> > We've just purchased a new Thecus U4500 NAS. The NAS can run numerous
> > filesystems including AFP. As we predominantly use Macs in the office
> > (we're a design studio) I've setup AFP and let the Macs connect using
> > that, and the remaining PC's in the office use their standard.
>
> > We used to suffer a lot from locked Mac files on our old Windows 2003
> > server, and a wealth of ._DS and ._filename files. If we are now using
> > AFP should I expect these problems to decrease? Is using AFP the best
> > way to connect?
>
> The network file system in use is not likely to be a significant
> contributor to the issue of locked files; that's likely an issue of the
> specific server software. You won't see a change in the number of
> .DS_Store files. You may or may not see a change in the appearance of
> the metadata files (the ._filename ones). That depends on how the NAS is
> storing the files it gets over AFP and how it shows them to clients
> using other protocols.

Are there any resources you could recommend for more information on
this?
From: Kevin McMurtrie on 7 Dec 2007 00:25
In article
<e3b183ca-d27b-4467-8d67-08041168be09(a)e67g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>,
Jeepstone <pete.jones(a)room58.com> wrote:

> We've just purchased a new Thecus U4500 NAS. The NAS can run numerous
> filesystems including AFP. As we predominantly use Macs in the office
> (we're a design studio) I've setup AFP and let the Macs connect using
> that, and the remaining PC's in the office use their standard.
>
> We used to suffer a lot from locked Mac files on our old Windows 2003
> server, and a wealth of ._DS and ._filename files. If we are now using
> AFP should I expect these problems to decrease? Is using AFP the best
> way to connect?

Locked files was a bug in Mac OS 10.0 through 10.3. All you had to do
was cancel a file copy and you'd have orphaned locks all over the place.
It's at least 99% fixed in 10.4.

..DS_Store files are still broken as of 10.5. They're put in shared
directories but they're not compatible with a multi-user environment.
You can disable them with:
defaults write com.apple.desktopservices DSDontWriteNetworkStores true

Then cleanup:
find /sharename -name '.DS_Store' -delete

I'd definitely use AFP for the Macs. SMB doesn't quite have the same
specifications as HFS+. You'll see some filename and metadata foo going
on when using a Mac with SMB. AFP is also more fault tolerant against
momentary outages. The one exception is if a very old version of AFP is
on the server that doesn't support long filenames.
From: Jeepstone on 7 Dec 2007 06:36
On Dec 7, 5:25 am, Kevin McMurtrie <mcmur...(a)dslextreme.com> wrote:
> In article
> <e3b183ca-d27b-4467-8d67-08041168b...(a)e67g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>,
>
> Jeepstone <pete.jo...(a)room58.com> wrote:
> > We've just purchased a new Thecus U4500 NAS. The NAS can run numerous
> > filesystems including AFP. As we predominantly use Macs in the office
> > (we're a design studio) I've setup AFP and let the Macs connect using
> > that, and the remaining PC's in the office use their standard.
>
> > We used to suffer a lot from locked Mac files on our old Windows 2003
> > server, and a wealth of ._DS and ._filename files. If we are now using
> > AFP should I expect these problems to decrease? Is using AFP the best
> > way to connect?
>
> Locked files was a bug in Mac OS 10.0 through 10.3. All you had to do
> was cancel a file copy and you'd have orphaned locks all over the place.
> It's at least 99% fixed in 10.4.
>
> .DS_Store files are still broken as of 10.5. They're put in shared
> directories but they're not compatible with a multi-user environment.
> You can disable them with:
> defaults write com.apple.desktopservices DSDontWriteNetworkStores true
>
> Then cleanup:
> find /sharename -name '.DS_Store' -delete
>
> I'd definitely use AFP for the Macs. SMB doesn't quite have the same
> specifications as HFS+. You'll see some filename and metadata foo going
> on when using a Mac with SMB. AFP is also more fault tolerant against
> momentary outages. The one exception is if a very old version of AFP is
> on the server that doesn't support long filenames.

Thanks both. Very useful
 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: Any hope for a Classic mode?
Next: Good News Mr 142.179.22.210 flood accessus.general