# Running Linux on parallels



## Cja123 (Dec 3, 2013)

Hello, 

I operate a consulting firm here in my home town and have a question that I hope to get some feedback on. I have a client who is currently running OSX server for file sharing purposes and that's pretty much it. One of the employees works over VPN about 130 miles away. For whatever reason, their access to files is slow enough to make operation impossible. I'm talking 10-15 mins to open a document. Now both sites are running comcast business class internet so I am assuming my problem doesn't have anything to do with the connection speed, both are the 50MB package. I have combed the internet and found many people who also experience slow file access over VPN with OSX server and AFP. I have tried a couple of workarounds, i.e. disabling the creation of .DS files and other problematic file types on the share but no dice. Oh and I took over this client about two months ago and I had nothing to do with how all of this was originally setup so preemptive defense for the inevitable burns.  

I was wondering if anyone on the forums had experience with running a linux file server on a mac using parallels? If so, does it work well? I heard linux file servers are pretty legit. I personally don't have any experience with them but I am certainly interested now that I have had so many problems with OSX's AFP service.

Buying new hardware or switching to a windows server really isn't an option right now so please don't suggest it, no matter how tempting it may be. I am really interested in some outside of the box ideas here so go nuts.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Dec 4, 2013)

Linux makes for a great lightweight file server. The problem in running it on Parallels is that the hypervisor which will emulate the hard drive will most likely be slower. If file transfer speed is your issue then setting up a file server in a virtual environment is not the answer.


----------



## Wrigleyvillain (Dec 4, 2013)

Why not just use SMB ("Windows Sharing") instead of AFP? Maybe there would not be much difference but certainly worth a try. In the Connect To Server box you just specify smb whereas it defaults to afp if nothing manually input (e.g. smb://your-server/sharepoint...or however they are connecting now just with smb:// specified).

Apple is even dumping AFP in favor of SMB (makes sense to me; don't need multiple protocols in the first place). Think already happened; maybe with 10.9.


----------



## Cja123 (Dec 4, 2013)

Easy Rhino said:


> Linux makes for a great lightweight file server. The problem in running it on Parallels is that the hypervisor which will emulate the hard drive will most likely be slower. If file transfer speed is your issue then setting up a file server in a virtual environment is not the answer.



Well it's complicated. File transfer becomes slow over VPN when the accessor is over 100 miles from the site. An employee accesses locally over VPN and file transfer speed is fine. Direct LAN access is blazing quick. I've researched this issue quite a bit and even though it sounds unique, it's not. I found many IT managers posting on apple support forums about the slowness of file access over VPN. 

From what I have learned so far, you can run linux equipment on minimal hardware. If I can get the costs down, a dedicated Linux box may be a possible solution. 



Wrigleyvillain said:


> Why not just use SMB ("Windows Sharing") instead of AFP? Maybe there would not be much difference but certainly worth a try. In the Connect To Server box you just specify smb whereas it defaults to afp if nothing manually input (e.g. smb://your-server/sharepoint...or however they are connecting now just with smb:// specified).



From what I understand of the issue, It doesn't matter whether it's SMB or AFP. Apparently the problem resides in how the finder sorts through the hidden excess on the share i.e. the DS_Store files. However, I have downloaded an app on the server that allegedly monitors network shares and removes these files as they are created. Though I have yet to see any improvement since it was installed...


----------



## Wrigleyvillain (Dec 4, 2013)

I still think it's worth a shot. You don't even have to change anything just possibly enable "Windows Sharing" as well and have them try smb://.

Yeah if you were running Linux and sharing smb with Samba there is an easy way to have it delete those files automatically. I agree that running it in Parallels doesn't seem to make a lot of sense offhand though.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Dec 4, 2013)

A cheap NAS with raid 1 would fit your needs just fine. No reason to build an entire system for file sharing.


----------



## Cja123 (Dec 4, 2013)

Easy Rhino said:


> A cheap NAS with raid 1 would fit your needs just fine. No reason to build an entire system for file sharing.


I was definitely thinking this as well. I just don't know where the client's head is at as far as new purchases. From our initial conversations, it was more about making it work with what they have. But this is probably something I should stand my ground on. Now they are a medical office and handle patient data on their shares. I don't know if a NAS will meet HIPAA regulations as well as a file server with multiple layers of authentication. I'll research that now.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Dec 4, 2013)

I believe any modern NAS allows you to encrypt the HDD.


----------



## Cja123 (Dec 4, 2013)

Easy Rhino said:


> I believe any modern NAS allows you to encrypt the HDD.



Thank you for the information, I really appreciate it.


----------

