Hi Jeremy, just tried your patch on 3.0.25a (it applied cleanly) and configured the suggested directives ("strict allocate", "strict sync", "sync always"). This way, the clients I have tested (Win2K with clear-text authentication, smbclient) get notified immediately about the lack of available quota. Relevant log excerpts:
(smbclient) [2007/06/11 22:24:12, 5] smbd/reply.c:reply_write_and_X(3159) reply_write_and_X: sync_file for samba-3.0.10-1.4E.12.2.src.rpm returned NT_ST ATUS_DISK_FULL [2007/06/11 22:24:12, 3] smbd/error.c:error_packet_set(106) error packet at smbd/reply.c(3160) cmd=47 (SMBwriteX) NT_STATUS_DISK_FULL ---- (Win2K) [2007/06/11 22:25:16, 5] smbd/reply.c:reply_write_and_X(3159) reply_write_and_X: sync_file for rvtls_putty.reg returned NT_STATUS_DISK_FULL [2007/06/11 22:25:16, 3] smbd/error.c:error_packet_set(106) error packet at smbd/reply.c(3160) cmd=47 (SMBwriteX) NT_STATUS_DISK_FULL What do you think are the chances of backporting it to 3.0.10 and 3.0.23c? I am willing to do the effort, just would like to know your opinion on it, since you seem to know the affected code very well ;) It would be nice very nice for us if we could send it to RedHat so they consider to issue an errata to RHEL4 and 5. About limiting the "syncy" behaviour just to the space allocation operation... I think maybe we are not interested in persuing it by now and we could sacrifice performance for safety. thank you, En/na Jeremy Allison ha escrit: > On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 08:23:49PM +0200, SER.RI-TIC - David Losada wrote: > >> mmm... well, it doesn't seem to be working like that in the version that >> ships with RHEL4. I will get around to try it on a fresh build on monday >> and report to you about it. >> > > Apply this patch and let me know if it fixes it (will be in 3.0.25b). > > Jeremy. >
-- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba