Re: [Samba] oplocks for Access DB
On Thu, Sep 05, 2013 at 11:07:17AM +1200, sond wrote: [DB_BE] path = /home/DATA2/DB_BE write list = +db-users force group = +db-users force create mode = 0770 force directory mode = 0770 oplocks = no level2 oplocks = no veto oplock files = /*.mdb/ With oplocks=no you don't need the other two. Any suggestions to improve this config would be welcome. Well, the only suggestion is to use a real database engine. Sorry, but a shared file multi-user database is just a very, very bad idea both performance- and integritywise. Volker -- SerNet GmbH, Bahnhofsallee 1b, 37081 Göttingen phone: +49-551-37-0, fax: +49-551-37-9 AG Göttingen, HRB 2816, GF: Dr. Johannes Loxen http://www.sernet.de, mailto:kont...@sernet.de * visit us on it-sa:IT security exhibitions in Nürnberg, Germany October 8th - 10th 2013, hall 12, booth 333 free tickets available via code 270691 on: www.it-sa.de/gutschein ** -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Re: [Samba] oplocks for Access DB
On 03/09/13 21:22, Volker Lendecke wrote: Hi! On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 09:10:18AM +1200, sond wrote: Hi Folks First time poster here.. I have a Samba 3.4.7 ( will upgrade soon ) in a workgroup enviroment, This server has a share containing various Access DB backends.. Wondering about the .ldb lock files that the client front-ends produce.. and if the oplocks and veto options are still current ? as various combinations i have tried don't seem to work.. Would be keen to hear how others handle Access back ends on Samba shares.. We believe that we handle oplocks and the real locks correctly. But as those files are typically shared, oplocks are usually lost quickly. So it should be okay to not grant oplock files at all on those shared files. What fails exactly? With best regards, Volker Lendecke Hi I did keep seeing .ldb lock files in the share containing the Access DB back-ends and am not sure if this is desirable or not in terms of optimisation and integrity.. However.. I have noticed an error in my smb.conf for the share that testparm didn't notify me of.. I had: veto oplock files = /*.mdb which I think should actually be: veto oplock files = /*.mdb/ ..so my current config for the share is now: ## -- Access back ends are here [DB_BE] path = /home/DATA2/DB_BE write list = +db-users force group = +db-users force create mode = 0770 force directory mode = 0770 oplocks = no level2 oplocks = no veto oplock files = /*.mdb/ guest ok = no printable = no browseable = no ## --- Any suggestions to improve this config would be welcome. Cheers sond -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Re: [Samba] oplocks for Access DB
Hi! On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 09:10:18AM +1200, sond wrote: Hi Folks First time poster here.. I have a Samba 3.4.7 ( will upgrade soon ) in a workgroup enviroment, This server has a share containing various Access DB backends.. Wondering about the .ldb lock files that the client front-ends produce.. and if the oplocks and veto options are still current ? as various combinations i have tried don't seem to work.. Would be keen to hear how others handle Access back ends on Samba shares.. We believe that we handle oplocks and the real locks correctly. But as those files are typically shared, oplocks are usually lost quickly. So it should be okay to not grant oplock files at all on those shared files. What fails exactly? With best regards, Volker Lendecke -- SerNet GmbH, Bahnhofsallee 1b, 37081 Göttingen phone: +49-551-37-0, fax: +49-551-37-9 AG Göttingen, HRB 2816, GF: Dr. Johannes Loxen http://www.sernet.de, mailto:kont...@sernet.de * visit us on it-sa:IT security exhibitions in Nürnberg, Germany October 8th - 10th 2013, hall 12, booth 333 free tickets available via code 270691 on: www.it-sa.de/gutschein ** -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
[Samba] oplocks for Access DB
Hi Folks First time poster here.. I have a Samba 3.4.7 ( will upgrade soon ) in a workgroup enviroment, This server has a share containing various Access DB backends.. Wondering about the .ldb lock files that the client front-ends produce.. and if the oplocks and veto options are still current ? as various combinations i have tried don't seem to work.. Would be keen to hear how others handle Access back ends on Samba shares.. cheers sond -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Re: [Samba] oplocks issue when trying to copy file
Hi! More interesting would be a debug level 10 logfile together with a strace -ttT -o /tmp/smbd.strace -p smbd-pid on the smbd relevant for the client. Volker On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 06:44:10PM +0100, Joschi Brauchle wrote: Hello everyone, I would like to follow up on the thread [Samba] oplocks issue when trying to copy file, which I found while googling for a problem. We have the same setup and problem mentioned in that thread: Our Samba server (version 3.5.12) exports a share that was mounted via NFS from another machine. We are using SUSE Linux Enterprise and this setup used to work with kernel oplocks = yes in SLES10, but not in SLES11SP1. I did some research and found that the kernel commit http://kernel.opensuse.org/cgit/kernel/commit/?h=SLE11-SP1id=dd143426eaaadea159c8dd2d3c9ff5e9da94bcfd mentioned in this thread is included in SLES11SP1 kernel 2.6.32.29. So I downgraded to SLES11SP1 2.6.32.12 on a test-machine and can confirm that the problem goes away with kernel oplocks turned on! As a workaround, one can disable kernel oplocks or use the -o nolock option when mounting via NFS. I guess this kernel regression should be reported to Novell. I can provide the samba-level-10 logfiles for 2.6.32.12 (working) and 2.6.32.29 (not working). Best regards, -- Dipl.-Ing. Joschi Brauchle, M.Sc. Institute for Communications Engineering (LNT) Technische Universitaet Muenchen (TUM) 80290 Munich, Germany Tel (work): +49 89 289-23474 Fax (work): +49 89 289-23490 E-mail: joschi.brauc...@tum.de Web: http://www.lnt.ei.tum.de/ -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba -- SerNet GmbH, Bahnhofsallee 1b, 37081 Göttingen phone: +49-551-37-0, fax: +49-551-37-9 AG Göttingen, HRB 2816, GF: Dr. Johannes Loxen http://www.sernet.de, mailto:kont...@sernet.de -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Re: [Samba] oplocks issue when trying to copy file
I reported the issue here: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8670 Please find level-10 logs and strace there. Best regards, Joschi Brauchle On 12/19/2011 10:57 AM, Volker Lendecke wrote: Hi! More interesting would be a debug level 10 logfile together with a strace -ttT -o /tmp/smbd.strace -psmbd-pid on the smbd relevant for the client. Volker On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 06:44:10PM +0100, Joschi Brauchle wrote: Hello everyone, I would like to follow up on the thread [Samba] oplocks issue when trying to copy file, which I found while googling for a problem. We have the same setup and problem mentioned in that thread: Our Samba server (version 3.5.12) exports a share that was mounted via NFS from another machine. We are using SUSE Linux Enterprise and this setup used to work with kernel oplocks = yes in SLES10, but not in SLES11SP1. I did some research and found that the kernel commit http://kernel.opensuse.org/cgit/kernel/commit/?h=SLE11-SP1id=dd143426eaaadea159c8dd2d3c9ff5e9da94bcfd mentioned in this thread is included in SLES11SP1 kernel 2.6.32.29. So I downgraded to SLES11SP1 2.6.32.12 on a test-machine and can confirm that the problem goes away with kernel oplocks turned on! As a workaround, one can disable kernel oplocks or use the -o nolock option when mounting via NFS. I guess this kernel regression should be reported to Novell. I can provide the samba-level-10 logfiles for 2.6.32.12 (working) and 2.6.32.29 (not working). Best regards, -- Dipl.-Ing. Joschi Brauchle, M.Sc. Institute for Communications Engineering (LNT) Technische Universitaet Muenchen (TUM) 80290 Munich, Germany Tel (work): +49 89 289-23474 Fax (work): +49 89 289-23490 E-mail: joschi.brauc...@tum.de Web: http://www.lnt.ei.tum.de/ -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba -- Dipl.-Ing. Joschi Brauchle, M.Sc. Institute for Communications Engineering (LNT) Technische Universitaet Muenchen (TUM) 80290 Munich, Germany Tel (work): +49 89 289-23474 Fax (work): +49 89 289-23490 E-mail: joschi.brauc...@tum.de Web: http://www.lnt.ei.tum.de/ -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
[Samba] oplocks issue when trying to copy file
Hello everyone, I would like to follow up on the thread [Samba] oplocks issue when trying to copy file, which I found while googling for a problem. We have the same setup and problem mentioned in that thread: Our Samba server (version 3.5.12) exports a share that was mounted via NFS from another machine. We are using SUSE Linux Enterprise and this setup used to work with kernel oplocks = yes in SLES10, but not in SLES11SP1. I did some research and found that the kernel commit http://kernel.opensuse.org/cgit/kernel/commit/?h=SLE11-SP1id=dd143426eaaadea159c8dd2d3c9ff5e9da94bcfd mentioned in this thread is included in SLES11SP1 kernel 2.6.32.29. So I downgraded to SLES11SP1 2.6.32.12 on a test-machine and can confirm that the problem goes away with kernel oplocks turned on! As a workaround, one can disable kernel oplocks or use the -o nolock option when mounting via NFS. I guess this kernel regression should be reported to Novell. I can provide the samba-level-10 logfiles for 2.6.32.12 (working) and 2.6.32.29 (not working). Best regards, -- Dipl.-Ing. Joschi Brauchle, M.Sc. Institute for Communications Engineering (LNT) Technische Universitaet Muenchen (TUM) 80290 Munich, Germany Tel (work): +49 89 289-23474 Fax (work): +49 89 289-23490 E-mail: joschi.brauc...@tum.de Web: http://www.lnt.ei.tum.de/ -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Re: [Samba] oplocks issue when trying to copy file
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 01:16:00PM -0700, Philip Ong wrote: I also tried 3.6.1 and it still has the issue -Original Message- From: Michael Wood [mailto:esiot...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, October 21, 2011 12:09 AM To: Philip Ong Cc: samba@lists.samba.org; samba-techni...@lists.samba.org Subject: Re: [Samba] oplocks issue when trying to copy file Try the samba-technical list. On 20 October 2011 08:33, Philip Ong ph...@nvidia.com wrote: I've narrowed this problem down to a patch that is applied in 2.6.36.3. I replaced file.c from 2.6.36.2 into 2.6.36.3 and Samba works fine. The problem is I'm not sure if Samba needs to be fixed or the kernel needs to be. Anyone know what the right action is? One thing I noticed was the invalid argument being sent in the debugging log. linux_set_kernel_oplock: Refused oplock on file home/foo/open/test.cfg, fd = 33, file_id = 17:aa41ab:0. (Invalid argument) Any advice would help. Hmmm. As the Samba code hasn't changed here w.r.t. requesting kernel oplocks it looks like a kernel regression to me. Jeremy. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Re: [Samba] oplocks issue when trying to copy file
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 11:33:32PM -0700, Philip Ong wrote: I've narrowed this problem down to a patch that is applied in 2.6.36.3. I replaced file.c from 2.6.36.2 into 2.6.36.3 and Samba works fine. The problem is I'm not sure if Samba needs to be fixed or the kernel needs to be. Anyone know what the right action is? One thing I noticed was the invalid argument being sent in the debugging log. linux_set_kernel_oplock: Refused oplock on file home/foo/open/test.cfg, fd = 33, file_id = 17:aa41ab:0. (Invalid argument) Any advice would help. Thanks, Phil The commit 129a84de2347002f09721cda3155ccfd19fade40 (locks: fix F_GETLK regression (failure to find conflicts)) fixed the posix_test_lock() function by itself, however, its usage in NFS changed by the commit 9d6a8c5c213e34c475e72b245a8eb709258e968c (locks: give posix_test_lock same interface as -lock) remained broken - subsequent NFS-specific locking code received F_UNLCK instead of the user-specified lock type. To fix the problem, fl-fl_type needs to be saved before the posix_test_lock() call and restored if no local conflicts were reported. Looking closer at the problem... We simply call fcntl(fd, F_SETLEASE, leasetype) on a fd to get a kernel oplock on it. int leasetype can be F_WRLCK or F_UNLCK (from Samba). This matches the fcntl F_SETLEASE documentation completely. There has been no change whatsoever in Samba in this regard. So I'm definitely calling kernel regression bug on this one. Jeremy. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Re: [Samba] oplocks issue when trying to copy file
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 05:35:01PM -0700, Jeremy Allison wrote: On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 11:33:32PM -0700, Philip Ong wrote: I've narrowed this problem down to a patch that is applied in 2.6.36.3. I replaced file.c from 2.6.36.2 into 2.6.36.3 and Samba works fine. The problem is I'm not sure if Samba needs to be fixed or the kernel needs to be. Anyone know what the right action is? One thing I noticed was the invalid argument being sent in the debugging log. linux_set_kernel_oplock: Refused oplock on file home/foo/open/test.cfg, fd = 33, file_id = 17:aa41ab:0. (Invalid argument) Any advice would help. Thanks, Phil The commit 129a84de2347002f09721cda3155ccfd19fade40 (locks: fix F_GETLK regression (failure to find conflicts)) fixed the posix_test_lock() function by itself, however, its usage in NFS changed by the commit 9d6a8c5c213e34c475e72b245a8eb709258e968c (locks: give posix_test_lock same interface as -lock) remained broken - subsequent NFS-specific locking code received F_UNLCK instead of the user-specified lock type. To fix the problem, fl-fl_type needs to be saved before the posix_test_lock() call and restored if no local conflicts were reported. Looking closer at the problem... We simply call fcntl(fd, F_SETLEASE, leasetype) on a fd to get a kernel oplock on it. int leasetype can be F_WRLCK or F_UNLCK (from Samba). This matches the fcntl F_SETLEASE documentation completely. There has been no change whatsoever in Samba in this regard. So I'm definitely calling kernel regression bug on this one. FYI. Can you help me by logging a bug with your Linux vendor on this one so we can get this fixed please ? Jeremy. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Re: [Samba] oplocks issue when trying to copy file
I don't have a linux vendor. We compile kernel.org kernel on top of Centos 5.x. kernel.org is still under construction so I'm not able to submit a bug. Any other suggestions? -Original Message- From: Jeremy Allison [mailto:j...@samba.org] Sent: Monday, October 24, 2011 5:36 PM To: Jeremy Allison Cc: Philip Ong; 'samba@lists.samba.org' Subject: Re: [Samba] oplocks issue when trying to copy file On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 05:35:01PM -0700, Jeremy Allison wrote: On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 11:33:32PM -0700, Philip Ong wrote: I've narrowed this problem down to a patch that is applied in 2.6.36.3. I replaced file.c from 2.6.36.2 into 2.6.36.3 and Samba works fine. The problem is I'm not sure if Samba needs to be fixed or the kernel needs to be. Anyone know what the right action is? One thing I noticed was the invalid argument being sent in the debugging log. linux_set_kernel_oplock: Refused oplock on file home/foo/open/test.cfg, fd = 33, file_id = 17:aa41ab:0. (Invalid argument) Any advice would help. Thanks, Phil The commit 129a84de2347002f09721cda3155ccfd19fade40 (locks: fix F_GETLK regression (failure to find conflicts)) fixed the posix_test_lock() function by itself, however, its usage in NFS changed by the commit 9d6a8c5c213e34c475e72b245a8eb709258e968c (locks: give posix_test_lock same interface as -lock) remained broken - subsequent NFS-specific locking code received F_UNLCK instead of the user-specified lock type. To fix the problem, fl-fl_type needs to be saved before the posix_test_lock() call and restored if no local conflicts were reported. Looking closer at the problem... We simply call fcntl(fd, F_SETLEASE, leasetype) on a fd to get a kernel oplock on it. int leasetype can be F_WRLCK or F_UNLCK (from Samba). This matches the fcntl F_SETLEASE documentation completely. There has been no change whatsoever in Samba in this regard. So I'm definitely calling kernel regression bug on this one. FYI. Can you help me by logging a bug with your Linux vendor on this one so we can get this fixed please ? Jeremy. --- This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. --- -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Re: [Samba] oplocks issue when trying to copy file
Try the samba-technical list.
On 20 October 2011 08:33, Philip Ong ph...@nvidia.com wrote:
I've narrowed this problem down to a patch that is applied in 2.6.36.3. I
replaced file.c from 2.6.36.2 into 2.6.36.3 and Samba works fine. The problem
is I'm not sure if Samba needs to be fixed or the kernel needs to be. Anyone
know what the right action is? One thing I noticed was the invalid argument
being sent in the debugging log.
linux_set_kernel_oplock: Refused oplock on file home/foo/open/test.cfg, fd
= 33, file_id = 17:aa41ab:0. (Invalid argument)
Any advice would help.
Thanks,
Phil
The commit 129a84de2347002f09721cda3155ccfd19fade40 (locks: fix F_GETLK
regression (failure to find conflicts)) fixed the posix_test_lock()
function by itself, however, its usage in NFS changed by the commit
9d6a8c5c213e34c475e72b245a8eb709258e968c (locks: give posix_test_lock
same interface as -lock) remained broken - subsequent NFS-specific
locking code received F_UNLCK instead of the user-specified lock type.
To fix the problem, fl-fl_type needs to be saved before the
posix_test_lock() call and restored if no local conflicts were reported.
Reference: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=23892
Tested-by: Alexander Morozov amorozov@xxx
Signed-off-by: Sergey Vlasov vsu@xxx
Signed-off-by: Trond Myklebust Trond.Myklebust@xx
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman gregkh@xxx
Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen ak@xxx
---
fs/nfs/file.c | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
Index: linux-2.6.35.y/fs/nfs/file.c
===
--- linux-2.6.35.y.orig/fs/nfs/file.c
+++ linux-2.6.35.y/fs/nfs/file.c
@@ -696,6 +696,7 @@ static int do_getlk(struct file *filp, i
{
struct inode *inode = filp-f_mapping-host;
int status = 0;
+ unsigned int saved_type = fl-fl_type;
/* Try local locking first */
posix_test_lock(filp, fl);
@@ -703,6 +704,7 @@ static int do_getlk(struct file *filp, i
/* found a conflict */
goto out;
}
+ fl-fl_type = saved_type;
if (nfs_have_delegation(inode, FMODE_READ))
goto out_noconflict;
--
-Original Message-
From: Philip Ong
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2011 10:41 PM
To: samba@lists.samba.org
Cc: Philip Ong
Subject: oplocks issue when trying to copy file
I'm not sure if this a Kernel/samba or NFS issue. We run this on Centos 5.6
using a kernel.org kernel.
Please find below the problem description
When trying to copy a file to a samba share which has NFS backend on 2.6.36.3
or newer Linux kernel following message is displayed on windows client
An unexpected error is keeping you from copying the file. If you continue to
receive this error, you can use the error code to search for help with this
problem.
Error 0x80070021: The process cannot access the file because another process
has locked a portion of the file
I am able to delete a file within the same directory structure. I am also
able to create a file or folder by right-clicking within Windows Explorer on
XP. Below are the logs generated by samba in debug mode. The main line of
interest was:
linux_set_kernel_oplock: Refused oplock on file home/foo/open/test.cfg, fd =
33, file_id = 17:aa41ab:0. (Invalid argument)
Please note test.cfg was the file which we were trying to copy from windows
check_reduced_name [home/foo/open/test.cfg] [/]
[2011/09/27 17:41:41.128330, 10] smbd/vfs.c:968(check_reduced_name)
check_reduced_name realpath [home/foo/open/test.cfg] -
[/home/foo/open/test.cfg]
[2011/09/27 17:41:41.128339, 3] smbd/vfs.c:1038(check_reduced_name)
check_reduced_name: home/foo/open/test.cfg reduced to /home/foo/open/test.cfg
[2011/09/27 17:41:41.128348, 10] smbd/open.c:3414(create_file_default)
create_file: access_mask = 0x6019f file_attributes = 0x20, share_access =
0x0, create_disposition = 0x2 create_options = 0x44 oplock_request
= 0x3 root_dir_fid = 0x0, ea_list = 0x(nil), sd = 0x(nil), fname =
home/foo/open/test.cfg
[2011/09/27 17:41:41.128359, 3] smbd/vfs.c:881(check_reduced_name)
check_reduced_name [home/foo/open/test.cfg] [/]
[2011/09/27 17:41:41.128377, 10] smbd/vfs.c:968(check_reduced_name)
check_reduced_name realpath [home/foo/open/test.cfg] -
[/home/foo/open/test.cfg]
[2011/09/27 17:41:41.128386, 3] smbd/vfs.c:1038(check_reduced_name)
check_reduced_name: home/foo/open/test.cfg reduced to /home/foo/open/test.cfg
[2011/09/27 17:41:41.128394, 10] smbd/open.c:2941(create_file_unixpath)
create_file_unixpath: access_mask = 0x6019f file_attributes = 0x20,
share_access = 0x0, create_disposition = 0x2 create_options = 0x44 oplock
_request = 0x3 ea_list = 0x(nil), sd = 0x(nil), fname = home/foo/open/test.cfg
[2011/09/27 17:41:41.128406, 5] smbd/files.c:119(file_new)
allocated file structure 14342, fnum = 18438 (4 used)
[2011/09/27 17:41:41.128416, 3] smbd/dosmode.c:166(unix_mode)
unix_mode(home/foo/open/test.cfg) returning
Re: [Samba] oplocks issue when trying to copy file
I also tried 3.6.1 and it still has the issue
-Original Message-
From: Michael Wood [mailto:esiot...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, October 21, 2011 12:09 AM
To: Philip Ong
Cc: samba@lists.samba.org; samba-techni...@lists.samba.org
Subject: Re: [Samba] oplocks issue when trying to copy file
Try the samba-technical list.
On 20 October 2011 08:33, Philip Ong ph...@nvidia.com wrote:
I've narrowed this problem down to a patch that is applied in 2.6.36.3. I
replaced file.c from 2.6.36.2 into 2.6.36.3 and Samba works fine. The problem
is I'm not sure if Samba needs to be fixed or the kernel needs to be. Anyone
know what the right action is? One thing I noticed was the invalid argument
being sent in the debugging log.
linux_set_kernel_oplock: Refused oplock on file home/foo/open/test.cfg, fd
= 33, file_id = 17:aa41ab:0. (Invalid argument)
Any advice would help.
Thanks,
Phil
The commit 129a84de2347002f09721cda3155ccfd19fade40 (locks: fix F_GETLK
regression (failure to find conflicts)) fixed the posix_test_lock()
function by itself, however, its usage in NFS changed by the commit
9d6a8c5c213e34c475e72b245a8eb709258e968c (locks: give posix_test_lock
same interface as -lock) remained broken - subsequent NFS-specific
locking code received F_UNLCK instead of the user-specified lock type.
To fix the problem, fl-fl_type needs to be saved before the
posix_test_lock() call and restored if no local conflicts were reported.
Reference: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=23892
Tested-by: Alexander Morozov amorozov@xxx
Signed-off-by: Sergey Vlasov vsu@xxx
Signed-off-by: Trond Myklebust Trond.Myklebust@xx
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman gregkh@xxx
Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen ak@xxx
---
fs/nfs/file.c | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
Index: linux-2.6.35.y/fs/nfs/file.c
===
--- linux-2.6.35.y.orig/fs/nfs/file.c
+++ linux-2.6.35.y/fs/nfs/file.c
@@ -696,6 +696,7 @@ static int do_getlk(struct file *filp, i
{
struct inode *inode = filp-f_mapping-host;
int status = 0;
+ unsigned int saved_type = fl-fl_type;
/* Try local locking first */
posix_test_lock(filp, fl);
@@ -703,6 +704,7 @@ static int do_getlk(struct file *filp, i
/* found a conflict */
goto out;
}
+ fl-fl_type = saved_type;
if (nfs_have_delegation(inode, FMODE_READ))
goto out_noconflict;
--
-Original Message-
From: Philip Ong
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2011 10:41 PM
To: samba@lists.samba.org
Cc: Philip Ong
Subject: oplocks issue when trying to copy file
I'm not sure if this a Kernel/samba or NFS issue. We run this on Centos 5.6
using a kernel.org kernel.
Please find below the problem description
When trying to copy a file to a samba share which has NFS backend on 2.6.36.3
or newer Linux kernel following message is displayed on windows client
An unexpected error is keeping you from copying the file. If you continue to
receive this error, you can use the error code to search for help with this
problem.
Error 0x80070021: The process cannot access the file because another process
has locked a portion of the file
I am able to delete a file within the same directory structure. I am also
able to create a file or folder by right-clicking within Windows Explorer on
XP. Below are the logs generated by samba in debug mode. The main line of
interest was:
linux_set_kernel_oplock: Refused oplock on file home/foo/open/test.cfg, fd =
33, file_id = 17:aa41ab:0. (Invalid argument)
Please note test.cfg was the file which we were trying to copy from windows
check_reduced_name [home/foo/open/test.cfg] [/]
[2011/09/27 17:41:41.128330, 10] smbd/vfs.c:968(check_reduced_name)
check_reduced_name realpath [home/foo/open/test.cfg] -
[/home/foo/open/test.cfg]
[2011/09/27 17:41:41.128339, 3] smbd/vfs.c:1038(check_reduced_name)
check_reduced_name: home/foo/open/test.cfg reduced to /home/foo/open/test.cfg
[2011/09/27 17:41:41.128348, 10] smbd/open.c:3414(create_file_default)
create_file: access_mask = 0x6019f file_attributes = 0x20, share_access =
0x0, create_disposition = 0x2 create_options = 0x44 oplock_request
= 0x3 root_dir_fid = 0x0, ea_list = 0x(nil), sd = 0x(nil), fname =
home/foo/open/test.cfg
[2011/09/27 17:41:41.128359, 3] smbd/vfs.c:881(check_reduced_name)
check_reduced_name [home/foo/open/test.cfg] [/]
[2011/09/27 17:41:41.128377, 10] smbd/vfs.c:968(check_reduced_name)
check_reduced_name realpath [home/foo/open/test.cfg] -
[/home/foo/open/test.cfg]
[2011/09/27 17:41:41.128386, 3] smbd/vfs.c:1038(check_reduced_name)
check_reduced_name: home/foo/open/test.cfg reduced to /home/foo/open/test.cfg
[2011/09/27 17:41:41.128394, 10] smbd/open.c:2941(create_file_unixpath)
create_file_unixpath: access_mask = 0x6019f file_attributes = 0x20,
share_access = 0x0, create_disposition = 0x2 create_options = 0x44 oplock
_request
Re: [Samba] oplocks issue when trying to copy file
I've narrowed this problem down to a patch that is applied in 2.6.36.3. I
replaced file.c from 2.6.36.2 into 2.6.36.3 and Samba works fine. The problem
is I'm not sure if Samba needs to be fixed or the kernel needs to be. Anyone
know what the right action is? One thing I noticed was the invalid argument
being sent in the debugging log.
linux_set_kernel_oplock: Refused oplock on file home/foo/open/test.cfg, fd =
33, file_id = 17:aa41ab:0. (Invalid argument)
Any advice would help.
Thanks,
Phil
The commit 129a84de2347002f09721cda3155ccfd19fade40 (locks: fix F_GETLK
regression (failure to find conflicts)) fixed the posix_test_lock()
function by itself, however, its usage in NFS changed by the commit
9d6a8c5c213e34c475e72b245a8eb709258e968c (locks: give posix_test_lock
same interface as -lock) remained broken - subsequent NFS-specific
locking code received F_UNLCK instead of the user-specified lock type.
To fix the problem, fl-fl_type needs to be saved before the
posix_test_lock() call and restored if no local conflicts were reported.
Reference: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=23892
Tested-by: Alexander Morozov amorozov@xxx
Signed-off-by: Sergey Vlasov vsu@xxx
Signed-off-by: Trond Myklebust Trond.Myklebust@xx
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman gregkh@xxx
Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen ak@xxx
---
fs/nfs/file.c | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
Index: linux-2.6.35.y/fs/nfs/file.c
===
--- linux-2.6.35.y.orig/fs/nfs/file.c
+++ linux-2.6.35.y/fs/nfs/file.c
@@ -696,6 +696,7 @@ static int do_getlk(struct file *filp, i
{
struct inode *inode = filp-f_mapping-host;
int status = 0;
+ unsigned int saved_type = fl-fl_type;
/* Try local locking first */
posix_test_lock(filp, fl);
@@ -703,6 +704,7 @@ static int do_getlk(struct file *filp, i
/* found a conflict */
goto out;
}
+ fl-fl_type = saved_type;
if (nfs_have_delegation(inode, FMODE_READ))
goto out_noconflict;
--
-Original Message-
From: Philip Ong
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2011 10:41 PM
To: samba@lists.samba.org
Cc: Philip Ong
Subject: oplocks issue when trying to copy file
I'm not sure if this a Kernel/samba or NFS issue. We run this on Centos 5.6
using a kernel.org kernel.
Please find below the problem description
When trying to copy a file to a samba share which has NFS backend on 2.6.36.3
or newer Linux kernel following message is displayed on windows client
An unexpected error is keeping you from copying the file. If you continue to
receive this error, you can use the error code to search for help with this
problem.
Error 0x80070021: The process cannot access the file because another process
has locked a portion of the file
I am able to delete a file within the same directory structure. I am also able
to create a file or folder by right-clicking within Windows Explorer on XP.
Below are the logs generated by samba in debug mode. The main line of interest
was:
linux_set_kernel_oplock: Refused oplock on file home/foo/open/test.cfg, fd =
33, file_id = 17:aa41ab:0. (Invalid argument)
Please note test.cfg was the file which we were trying to copy from windows
check_reduced_name [home/foo/open/test.cfg] [/]
[2011/09/27 17:41:41.128330, 10] smbd/vfs.c:968(check_reduced_name)
check_reduced_name realpath [home/foo/open/test.cfg] -
[/home/foo/open/test.cfg]
[2011/09/27 17:41:41.128339, 3] smbd/vfs.c:1038(check_reduced_name)
check_reduced_name: home/foo/open/test.cfg reduced to /home/foo/open/test.cfg
[2011/09/27 17:41:41.128348, 10] smbd/open.c:3414(create_file_default)
create_file: access_mask = 0x6019f file_attributes = 0x20, share_access =
0x0, create_disposition = 0x2 create_options = 0x44 oplock_request
= 0x3 root_dir_fid = 0x0, ea_list = 0x(nil), sd = 0x(nil), fname =
home/foo/open/test.cfg
[2011/09/27 17:41:41.128359, 3] smbd/vfs.c:881(check_reduced_name)
check_reduced_name [home/foo/open/test.cfg] [/]
[2011/09/27 17:41:41.128377, 10] smbd/vfs.c:968(check_reduced_name)
check_reduced_name realpath [home/foo/open/test.cfg] -
[/home/foo/open/test.cfg]
[2011/09/27 17:41:41.128386, 3] smbd/vfs.c:1038(check_reduced_name)
check_reduced_name: home/foo/open/test.cfg reduced to /home/foo/open/test.cfg
[2011/09/27 17:41:41.128394, 10] smbd/open.c:2941(create_file_unixpath)
create_file_unixpath: access_mask = 0x6019f file_attributes = 0x20,
share_access = 0x0, create_disposition = 0x2 create_options = 0x44 oplock
_request = 0x3 ea_list = 0x(nil), sd = 0x(nil), fname = home/foo/open/test.cfg
[2011/09/27 17:41:41.128406, 5] smbd/files.c:119(file_new)
allocated file structure 14342, fnum = 18438 (4 used)
[2011/09/27 17:41:41.128416, 3] smbd/dosmode.c:166(unix_mode)
unix_mode(home/foo/open/test.cfg) returning 0744
[2011/09/27 17:41:41.128424, 10] smbd/open.c:1556(open_file_ntcreate)
open_file_ntcreate: fname=home/foo/open/test.cfg, dos_attrs=0x20
access_mask=0x6019f
Re: [Samba] oplocks issue when trying to copy file
Kernel tried on Centos 4.5 was 2.6.38.8 -Original Message- From: Philip Ong Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2011 3:44 PM To: Philip Ong; 'samba@lists.samba.org' Subject: RE: oplocks issue when trying to copy file I also tried this on Centos 4.5 and it has the same results so it is probably not distro related. -Original Message- From: Philip Ong Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2011 10:41 PM To: samba@lists.samba.org Cc: Philip Ong Subject: oplocks issue when trying to copy file I'm not sure if this a Kernel/samba or NFS issue. We run this on Centos 5.6 using a kernel.org kernel. Please find below the problem description When trying to copy a file to a samba share which has NFS backend on 2.6.36.3 or newer Linux kernel following message is displayed on windows client An unexpected error is keeping you from copying the file. If you continue to receive this error, you can use the error code to search for help with this problem. Error 0x80070021: The process cannot access the file because another process has locked a portion of the file I am able to delete a file within the same directory structure. I am also able to create a file or folder by right-clicking within Windows Explorer on XP. Below are the logs generated by samba in debug mode. The main line of interest was: linux_set_kernel_oplock: Refused oplock on file home/foo/open/test.cfg, fd = 33, file_id = 17:aa41ab:0. (Invalid argument) Please note test.cfg was the file which we were trying to copy from windows check_reduced_name [home/foo/open/test.cfg] [/] [2011/09/27 17:41:41.128330, 10] smbd/vfs.c:968(check_reduced_name) check_reduced_name realpath [home/foo/open/test.cfg] - [/home/foo/open/test.cfg] [2011/09/27 17:41:41.128339, 3] smbd/vfs.c:1038(check_reduced_name) check_reduced_name: home/foo/open/test.cfg reduced to /home/foo/open/test.cfg [2011/09/27 17:41:41.128348, 10] smbd/open.c:3414(create_file_default) create_file: access_mask = 0x6019f file_attributes = 0x20, share_access = 0x0, create_disposition = 0x2 create_options = 0x44 oplock_request = 0x3 root_dir_fid = 0x0, ea_list = 0x(nil), sd = 0x(nil), fname = home/foo/open/test.cfg [2011/09/27 17:41:41.128359, 3] smbd/vfs.c:881(check_reduced_name) check_reduced_name [home/foo/open/test.cfg] [/] [2011/09/27 17:41:41.128377, 10] smbd/vfs.c:968(check_reduced_name) check_reduced_name realpath [home/foo/open/test.cfg] - [/home/foo/open/test.cfg] [2011/09/27 17:41:41.128386, 3] smbd/vfs.c:1038(check_reduced_name) check_reduced_name: home/foo/open/test.cfg reduced to /home/foo/open/test.cfg [2011/09/27 17:41:41.128394, 10] smbd/open.c:2941(create_file_unixpath) create_file_unixpath: access_mask = 0x6019f file_attributes = 0x20, share_access = 0x0, create_disposition = 0x2 create_options = 0x44 oplock _request = 0x3 ea_list = 0x(nil), sd = 0x(nil), fname = home/foo/open/test.cfg [2011/09/27 17:41:41.128406, 5] smbd/files.c:119(file_new) allocated file structure 14342, fnum = 18438 (4 used) [2011/09/27 17:41:41.128416, 3] smbd/dosmode.c:166(unix_mode) unix_mode(home/foo/open/test.cfg) returning 0744 [2011/09/27 17:41:41.128424, 10] smbd/open.c:1556(open_file_ntcreate) open_file_ntcreate: fname=home/foo/open/test.cfg, dos_attrs=0x20 access_mask=0x6019f share_access=0x0 create_disposition = 0x2 create_options =0x44 unix mode=0744 oplock_request=3 [2011/09/27 17:41:41.128434, 3] smbd/vfs.c:881(check_reduced_name) check_reduced_name [home/foo/open/test.cfg] [/] [2011/09/27 17:41:41.128462, 10] smbd/vfs.c:968(check_reduced_name) check_reduced_name realpath [home/foo/open/test.cfg] - [/home/foo/open/test.cfg] [2011/09/27 17:41:41.128471, 3] smbd/vfs.c:1038(check_reduced_name) check_reduced_name: home/foo/open/test.cfg reduced to /home/foo/open/test.cfg [2011/09/27 17:41:41.128480, 10] smbd/open.c:1738(open_file_ntcreate) open_file_ntcreate: fname=home/foo/open/test.cfg, after mapping access_mask=0x6019f [2011/09/27 17:41:41.128489, 4] smbd/open.c:2000(open_file_ntcreate) calling open_file with flags=0x2 flags2=0xC0 mode=0744, access_mask = 0x6019f, open_access_mask = 0x6019f [2011/09/27 17:41:41.132844, 10] smbd/open.c:180(fd_open) fd_open: name home/foo/open/test.cfg, flags = 0302 mode = 0744, fd = 33. [2011/09/27 17:41:41.132887, 10] smbd/notify_internal.c:890(notify_trigger) notify_trigger called action=0x1, filter=0x1, path=//home/foo/open/test.cfg [2011/09/27 17:41:41.132897, 2] smbd/open.c:657(open_file) jneil opened file home/foo/open/test.cfg read=Yes write=Yes (numopen=4) [2011/09/27 17:41:41.132909, 10] lib/dbwrap_tdb.c:100(db_tdb_fetch_locked) Locking key 1700AB41 [2011/09/27 17:41:41.132919, 10] lib/dbwrap_tdb.c:129(db_tdb_fetch_locked) Allocated locked data 0x0x782393a0 [2011/09/27 17:41:41.132938, 10] smbd/open.c:1057(delay_for_oplocks) delay_for_oplocks: oplock type 0x3 on file home/foo/open/test.cfg [2011/09/27 17:41:41.132947, 10] smbd/open.c:1057(delay_for_oplocks)
Re: [Samba] oplocks issue when trying to copy file
I also tried this on Centos 4.5 and it has the same results so it is probably not distro related. -Original Message- From: Philip Ong Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2011 10:41 PM To: samba@lists.samba.org Cc: Philip Ong Subject: oplocks issue when trying to copy file I'm not sure if this a Kernel/samba or NFS issue. We run this on Centos 5.6 using a kernel.org kernel. Please find below the problem description When trying to copy a file to a samba share which has NFS backend on 2.6.36.3 or newer Linux kernel following message is displayed on windows client An unexpected error is keeping you from copying the file. If you continue to receive this error, you can use the error code to search for help with this problem. Error 0x80070021: The process cannot access the file because another process has locked a portion of the file I am able to delete a file within the same directory structure. I am also able to create a file or folder by right-clicking within Windows Explorer on XP. Below are the logs generated by samba in debug mode. The main line of interest was: linux_set_kernel_oplock: Refused oplock on file home/foo/open/test.cfg, fd = 33, file_id = 17:aa41ab:0. (Invalid argument) Please note test.cfg was the file which we were trying to copy from windows check_reduced_name [home/foo/open/test.cfg] [/] [2011/09/27 17:41:41.128330, 10] smbd/vfs.c:968(check_reduced_name) check_reduced_name realpath [home/foo/open/test.cfg] - [/home/foo/open/test.cfg] [2011/09/27 17:41:41.128339, 3] smbd/vfs.c:1038(check_reduced_name) check_reduced_name: home/foo/open/test.cfg reduced to /home/foo/open/test.cfg [2011/09/27 17:41:41.128348, 10] smbd/open.c:3414(create_file_default) create_file: access_mask = 0x6019f file_attributes = 0x20, share_access = 0x0, create_disposition = 0x2 create_options = 0x44 oplock_request = 0x3 root_dir_fid = 0x0, ea_list = 0x(nil), sd = 0x(nil), fname = home/foo/open/test.cfg [2011/09/27 17:41:41.128359, 3] smbd/vfs.c:881(check_reduced_name) check_reduced_name [home/foo/open/test.cfg] [/] [2011/09/27 17:41:41.128377, 10] smbd/vfs.c:968(check_reduced_name) check_reduced_name realpath [home/foo/open/test.cfg] - [/home/foo/open/test.cfg] [2011/09/27 17:41:41.128386, 3] smbd/vfs.c:1038(check_reduced_name) check_reduced_name: home/foo/open/test.cfg reduced to /home/foo/open/test.cfg [2011/09/27 17:41:41.128394, 10] smbd/open.c:2941(create_file_unixpath) create_file_unixpath: access_mask = 0x6019f file_attributes = 0x20, share_access = 0x0, create_disposition = 0x2 create_options = 0x44 oplock _request = 0x3 ea_list = 0x(nil), sd = 0x(nil), fname = home/foo/open/test.cfg [2011/09/27 17:41:41.128406, 5] smbd/files.c:119(file_new) allocated file structure 14342, fnum = 18438 (4 used) [2011/09/27 17:41:41.128416, 3] smbd/dosmode.c:166(unix_mode) unix_mode(home/foo/open/test.cfg) returning 0744 [2011/09/27 17:41:41.128424, 10] smbd/open.c:1556(open_file_ntcreate) open_file_ntcreate: fname=home/foo/open/test.cfg, dos_attrs=0x20 access_mask=0x6019f share_access=0x0 create_disposition = 0x2 create_options =0x44 unix mode=0744 oplock_request=3 [2011/09/27 17:41:41.128434, 3] smbd/vfs.c:881(check_reduced_name) check_reduced_name [home/foo/open/test.cfg] [/] [2011/09/27 17:41:41.128462, 10] smbd/vfs.c:968(check_reduced_name) check_reduced_name realpath [home/foo/open/test.cfg] - [/home/foo/open/test.cfg] [2011/09/27 17:41:41.128471, 3] smbd/vfs.c:1038(check_reduced_name) check_reduced_name: home/foo/open/test.cfg reduced to /home/foo/open/test.cfg [2011/09/27 17:41:41.128480, 10] smbd/open.c:1738(open_file_ntcreate) open_file_ntcreate: fname=home/foo/open/test.cfg, after mapping access_mask=0x6019f [2011/09/27 17:41:41.128489, 4] smbd/open.c:2000(open_file_ntcreate) calling open_file with flags=0x2 flags2=0xC0 mode=0744, access_mask = 0x6019f, open_access_mask = 0x6019f [2011/09/27 17:41:41.132844, 10] smbd/open.c:180(fd_open) fd_open: name home/foo/open/test.cfg, flags = 0302 mode = 0744, fd = 33. [2011/09/27 17:41:41.132887, 10] smbd/notify_internal.c:890(notify_trigger) notify_trigger called action=0x1, filter=0x1, path=//home/foo/open/test.cfg [2011/09/27 17:41:41.132897, 2] smbd/open.c:657(open_file) jneil opened file home/foo/open/test.cfg read=Yes write=Yes (numopen=4) [2011/09/27 17:41:41.132909, 10] lib/dbwrap_tdb.c:100(db_tdb_fetch_locked) Locking key 1700AB41 [2011/09/27 17:41:41.132919, 10] lib/dbwrap_tdb.c:129(db_tdb_fetch_locked) Allocated locked data 0x0x782393a0 [2011/09/27 17:41:41.132938, 10] smbd/open.c:1057(delay_for_oplocks) delay_for_oplocks: oplock type 0x3 on file home/foo/open/test.cfg [2011/09/27 17:41:41.132947, 10] smbd/open.c:1057(delay_for_oplocks) delay_for_oplocks: oplock type 0x3 on file home/foo/open/test.cfg [2011/09/27 17:41:41.267573, 3] smbd/oplock_linux.c:120(linux_set_kernel_oplock) linux_set_kernel_oplock: Refused oplock on file home/foo/open/test.cfg, fd =
[Samba] oplocks issue when trying to copy file
I'm not sure if this a Kernel/samba or NFS issue. We run this on Centos 5.6 using a kernel.org kernel. Please find below the problem description When trying to copy a file to a samba share which has NFS backend on 2.6.36.3 or newer Linux kernel following message is displayed on windows client An unexpected error is keeping you from copying the file. If you continue to receive this error, you can use the error code to search for help with this problem. Error 0x80070021: The process cannot access the file because another process has locked a portion of the file I am able to delete a file within the same directory structure. I am also able to create a file or folder by right-clicking within Windows Explorer on XP. Below are the logs generated by samba in debug mode. The main line of interest was: linux_set_kernel_oplock: Refused oplock on file home/foo/open/test.cfg, fd = 33, file_id = 17:aa41ab:0. (Invalid argument) Please note test.cfg was the file which we were trying to copy from windows check_reduced_name [home/foo/open/test.cfg] [/] [2011/09/27 17:41:41.128330, 10] smbd/vfs.c:968(check_reduced_name) check_reduced_name realpath [home/foo/open/test.cfg] - [/home/foo/open/test.cfg] [2011/09/27 17:41:41.128339, 3] smbd/vfs.c:1038(check_reduced_name) check_reduced_name: home/foo/open/test.cfg reduced to /home/foo/open/test.cfg [2011/09/27 17:41:41.128348, 10] smbd/open.c:3414(create_file_default) create_file: access_mask = 0x6019f file_attributes = 0x20, share_access = 0x0, create_disposition = 0x2 create_options = 0x44 oplock_request = 0x3 root_dir_fid = 0x0, ea_list = 0x(nil), sd = 0x(nil), fname = home/foo/open/test.cfg [2011/09/27 17:41:41.128359, 3] smbd/vfs.c:881(check_reduced_name) check_reduced_name [home/foo/open/test.cfg] [/] [2011/09/27 17:41:41.128377, 10] smbd/vfs.c:968(check_reduced_name) check_reduced_name realpath [home/foo/open/test.cfg] - [/home/foo/open/test.cfg] [2011/09/27 17:41:41.128386, 3] smbd/vfs.c:1038(check_reduced_name) check_reduced_name: home/foo/open/test.cfg reduced to /home/foo/open/test.cfg [2011/09/27 17:41:41.128394, 10] smbd/open.c:2941(create_file_unixpath) create_file_unixpath: access_mask = 0x6019f file_attributes = 0x20, share_access = 0x0, create_disposition = 0x2 create_options = 0x44 oplock _request = 0x3 ea_list = 0x(nil), sd = 0x(nil), fname = home/foo/open/test.cfg [2011/09/27 17:41:41.128406, 5] smbd/files.c:119(file_new) allocated file structure 14342, fnum = 18438 (4 used) [2011/09/27 17:41:41.128416, 3] smbd/dosmode.c:166(unix_mode) unix_mode(home/foo/open/test.cfg) returning 0744 [2011/09/27 17:41:41.128424, 10] smbd/open.c:1556(open_file_ntcreate) open_file_ntcreate: fname=home/foo/open/test.cfg, dos_attrs=0x20 access_mask=0x6019f share_access=0x0 create_disposition = 0x2 create_options =0x44 unix mode=0744 oplock_request=3 [2011/09/27 17:41:41.128434, 3] smbd/vfs.c:881(check_reduced_name) check_reduced_name [home/foo/open/test.cfg] [/] [2011/09/27 17:41:41.128462, 10] smbd/vfs.c:968(check_reduced_name) check_reduced_name realpath [home/foo/open/test.cfg] - [/home/foo/open/test.cfg] [2011/09/27 17:41:41.128471, 3] smbd/vfs.c:1038(check_reduced_name) check_reduced_name: home/foo/open/test.cfg reduced to /home/foo/open/test.cfg [2011/09/27 17:41:41.128480, 10] smbd/open.c:1738(open_file_ntcreate) open_file_ntcreate: fname=home/foo/open/test.cfg, after mapping access_mask=0x6019f [2011/09/27 17:41:41.128489, 4] smbd/open.c:2000(open_file_ntcreate) calling open_file with flags=0x2 flags2=0xC0 mode=0744, access_mask = 0x6019f, open_access_mask = 0x6019f [2011/09/27 17:41:41.132844, 10] smbd/open.c:180(fd_open) fd_open: name home/foo/open/test.cfg, flags = 0302 mode = 0744, fd = 33. [2011/09/27 17:41:41.132887, 10] smbd/notify_internal.c:890(notify_trigger) notify_trigger called action=0x1, filter=0x1, path=//home/foo/open/test.cfg [2011/09/27 17:41:41.132897, 2] smbd/open.c:657(open_file) jneil opened file home/foo/open/test.cfg read=Yes write=Yes (numopen=4) [2011/09/27 17:41:41.132909, 10] lib/dbwrap_tdb.c:100(db_tdb_fetch_locked) Locking key 1700AB41 [2011/09/27 17:41:41.132919, 10] lib/dbwrap_tdb.c:129(db_tdb_fetch_locked) Allocated locked data 0x0x782393a0 [2011/09/27 17:41:41.132938, 10] smbd/open.c:1057(delay_for_oplocks) delay_for_oplocks: oplock type 0x3 on file home/foo/open/test.cfg [2011/09/27 17:41:41.132947, 10] smbd/open.c:1057(delay_for_oplocks) delay_for_oplocks: oplock type 0x3 on file home/foo/open/test.cfg [2011/09/27 17:41:41.267573, 3] smbd/oplock_linux.c:120(linux_set_kernel_oplock) linux_set_kernel_oplock: Refused oplock on file home/foo/open/test.cfg, fd = 33, file_id = 17:aa41ab:0. (Invalid argument) [2011/09/27 17:41:41.267612, 10] smbd/dosmode.c:701(file_set_dosmode) file_set_dosmode: setting dos mode 0x20 on file home/foo/open/test.cfg [2011/09/27 17:41:41.267631, 8] smbd/dosmode.c:613(dos_mode) dos_mode:
[Samba] Oplocks offline files win 7
Hi to all! We experience problems with offline files - especially with xls or xlsx files - between samba 3.5.9 and win 7 smb.conf for the network share [homes] comment = Home Directories browseable = no writable = yes guest ok = no create mask = 0611 directory mask = 0700 follow symlinks = no wide links = no oplocks = yes level2 oplocks = yes map archive = yes map system = yes map hidden = yes Can somebody give me a hint here please? regards Martin -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Re: [Samba] Oplocks offline files win 7
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 14:22, Martin Hochreiter linux...@wavenet.atwrote: We experience problems with offline files - especially with xls or xlsx files - between samba 3.5.9 and win 7 Disable offline files in Windows 7 group policies. -- Sent from my PC. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Re: [Samba] Oplocks offline files win 7
Am 2011-06-27 14:02, schrieb Ander Punnar: On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 14:22, Martin Hochreiter linux...@wavenet.at mailto:linux...@wavenet.at wrote: We experience problems with offline files - especially with xls or xlsx files - between samba 3.5.9 and win 7 Disable offline files in Windows 7 group policies. -- Sent from my PC. mhmm ... we want to use that shares offline, if I disable them in the group policies then the sync would not be working any more or has this an other effect? regards -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Re: [Samba] Oplocks offline files win 7
On 06/27/2011 08:18 AM, Martin Hochreiter wrote: Am 2011-06-27 14:02, schrieb Ander Punnar: On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 14:22, Martin Hochreiter linux...@wavenet.at mailto:linux...@wavenet.at wrote: We experience problems with offline files - especially with xls or xlsx files - between samba 3.5.9 and win 7 Disable offline files in Windows 7 group policies. -- Sent from my PC. mhmm ... we want to use that shares offline, if I disable them in the group policies then the sync would not be working any more or has this an other effect? regards Is your samba server a DC or a member server? Our server is a DC (Samba 3.5.8 on Solaris 10.) If we enable offline files on a Windows 7 laptop, cached credentials are broken and users cannot login offline at all. I think Windows XP is OK. It looks something changes with Windows Vista.I don't know what is going wrong, but I suspect there is the same underlying cause as your problem. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Re: [Samba] Oplocks offline files win 7 excel
Is your samba server a DC or a member server? Our server is a DC (Samba 3.5.8 on Solaris 10.) If we enable offline files on a Windows 7 laptop, cached credentials are broken and users cannot login offline at all. I think Windows XP is OK. It looks something changes with Windows Vista.I don't know what is going wrong, but I suspect there is the same underlying cause as your problem. Hi! That server is a DC (Samba 3.5.9 on CentOS 5.5). We dont have the problem with offline logins with windows 7 while offline sync is on, the only problem we see is curiously with that win7 samba 3.5.9 can't sync excel files ... regards Martin -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
[Samba] oplocks = No don't works
Hi guys I have that config in global section of smb.conf: kernel oplocks = No locking = Yes oplocks = No level2 oplocks = No strict locking = No veto oplock files = /*.pdf/*.PST/*.pst/*.doc/*.xls/*.docx/*.mdb/*.MDB/*.dbf/*.DBF/*.ppt/*.xlsx/ I restart the service and I am still getting that log: [2010/12/23 11:16:24.105806, 5] smbd/oplock.c:86(set_file_oplock) set_file_oplock: granted oplock on file folder/filename.xlsx, fd00:b38018:0/23, tv_sec = 4d1359b8, tv_usec = 19ce5 How can I turn off this? Rafael Gomes Consultor em TI LPIC-1 MCSO (71) 8318-0284 IV Encontro Nordestino de Software Livre IV Encontro Potiguar de Software Livre http://ensl.org.br Atenção: Este e-mail pode conter anexos no formato ODF (Open Document Format)/ABNT (extensões odt, ods, odp, odb, odg). Antes de pedir os anexos em outro formato, você pode instalar gratuita e livremente o BrOffice (http://www.broffice.org). -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
[Samba] oplocks failed if user is not the owner of the file?
Maybe, my last question was to short, but I would like to clear this: Some users are faster than other users, I think because of caching the files on the client. I have some identical windows 7 clients. All connected to Samba 3.5.6-4.1-2450-SUSE-SL11.2-x86_64 Samba is acting as a domain-master. This is a part of smb.conf: [global] workgroup = Firma map to guest = Bad User passdb backend = tdbsam:/etc/samba/passdb.tdb time server = Yes socket options = TCP_NODELAY IPTOS_LOWDELAY printcap name = cups add machine script = /usr/sbin/useradd -d /var/lib/nobody -g 100 -s /bin/false -M %u logon script = netlogon.cmd logon path = \\%L\profiles\.msprofile logon drive = h: logon home = \\%L\%U\.9xprofile domain logons = Yes os level = 65 preferred master = Yes domain master = Yes wins support = Yes ldap ssl = no cups options = raw [public] comment = Datenverzeichnis path = /daten/public read only = No create mask = 0770 directory mask = 0770 If they the owner of the files, smbstatus shows me: Pid UidDenyMode Access R/WOplock SharePath Name Time 149551000 DENY_NONE 0x2019f RDWR EXCLUSIVE+BATCH /daten/public CARD80/DHD-ORT2/ProData/DOM00105.MDX Wed Dec 1 10:09:02 2010 If the don't own the file: Pid UidDenyMode Access R/WOplock SharePath Name Time 5582 1002 DENY_NONE 0x2019f RDWR NONE /daten/public CARD80/DHD-ORT2/ProData/DOM00105.MDX Wed Dec 1 10:12:06 2010 It means on my opinion, for file-owners the file get cached- and for others not. What is the reason for this? And how can I change this? The path /daten/public is located on a ext3 filesystem, mounted with acl,user_xattr Thanks in advance Georg Weickelt ___ WEB.DE DSL Doppel-Flat ab 19,99 euro;/mtl.! Jetzt auch mit gratis Notebook-Flat! http://produkte.web.de/go/DSL_Doppel_Flatrate/2 -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
[Samba] oplocks failed if user is not the owner of the file?
I have some identical windows 7 clients. All connected to Samba 3.5.4-1.1-2382-SUSE-SL11.0. If I'm the windows-owner of the file, swat shows me under oplock exclusive+batch. Other users get: none. What is the reason for this? ___ Neu: WEB.DE De-Mail - Einfach wie E-Mail, sicher wie ein Brief! Jetzt De-Mail-Adresse reservieren: https://produkte.web.de/go/demail02 -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Re: [Samba] Oplocks
On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 05:20:50PM +0200, Volker Lendecke wrote: Right. Then it's a bug. You might contact your RPM provider for support of this old Samba version. Is Samba 3.3.8 also too old? It suffers from the same problem. -- Lukáš Hejtmánek -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
[Samba] Oplocks
Hello,
I'm using the Samba server 3.0.33 that exports volume from a GPFS. The GPFS
strongly dislikes unlinking files that are locked (resulting in permission
denied) using fcntl F_SETLEASE.
It seems that the Samba *sometimes* tries to unlink a file that is oplocked.
Why? Is this a bug? Why it does not happen always but only sometimes? I have
strace logs showing:
Wrong case:
8711 14:57:50.765677
open(Y_odloz/D8/D8_03_Ivet_98/06aa6459-a011-40f8-bfb1-25d15e7ada61,
O_RDWR|O_CREAT|O_EXCL, 0744) = 121
8711 14:57:50.766030 fstat(121, {st_dev=makedev(0, 23), st_ino=3079419,
st_mode=S_IFREG|0744, st_nlink=1, st_uid=40022, st_gid=400, st_blksize=262144,
st_blocks=0, st_size=0, st_atime=2010/07/13-14:57:50,
st_mtime=2010/07/13-14:57:50, st_ctime=2010/07/13-14:57:50}) = 0
8711 14:57:50.766129 fcntl(12, F_SETLKW, {type=F_WRLCK, whence=SEEK_SET,
start=8260, len=1}) = 0
8711 14:57:50.766214 fcntl(121, F_SETSIG, 0x23) = 0
8711 14:57:50.766275 fcntl(121, F_SETLEASE, 0x1) = 0
[...]
8711 14:57:50.789570
stat(Y_odloz/D8/D8_03_Ivet_98/06aa6459-a011-40f8-bfb1-25d15e7ada61,
{st_dev=makedev(0, 23), st_ino=3079419, st_mode=S_IFREG|0744, st_nlink=1,
st_uid=40022, st_gid=400, st_blksize=262144, st_blocks=0, st_size=0,
st_atime=2010/07/13-14:57:50, st_mtime=2010/07/13-14:57:50,
st_ctime=2010/07/13-14:57:50}) = 0
8711 14:57:50.789685
unlink(Y_odloz/D8/D8_03_Ivet_98/06aa6459-a011-40f8-bfb1-25d15e7ada61) = -1
EACCES (Permission denied)
[...]
8711 14:58:20.785599 fcntl(121, F_SETSIG, 0x23) = 0
8711 14:58:20.785660 fcntl(121, F_SETLEASE, 0x2) = 0
8711 14:58:20.785736 close(121)= 0
Correct case:
8711 15:02:01.279971
open(Y_odloz/D8/D8_03_Ivet_98/0720d2bf-8619-4ecb-a2eb-d2b806941539,
O_RDWR|O_CREAT|O_EXCL, 0744) = 166
8711 15:02:01.333073 fstat(166, {st_dev=makedev(0, 23), st_ino=3164278,
st_mode=S_IFREG|0744, st_nlink=1, st_uid=40022, st_gid=400, st_blksize=262144,
st_blocks=0, st_size=0, st_atime=2010/07/13-15:02:01,
st_mtime=2010/07/13-15:02:01, st_ctime=2010/07/13-15:02:01}) = 0
8711 15:02:01.333221 fcntl(12, F_SETLKW, {type=F_WRLCK, whence=SEEK_SET,
start=24956, len=1}) = 0
8711 15:02:01.09 fcntl(166, F_SETSIG, 0x23) = 0
8711 15:02:01.71 fcntl(166, F_SETLEASE, 0x1) = 0
[...]
8711 15:02:01.424660 fcntl(166, F_SETSIG, 0x23) = 0
8711 15:02:01.424734 fcntl(166, F_SETLEASE, 0x2) = 0
[...]
8711 15:02:01.513181
stat(Y_odloz/D8/D8_03_Ivet_98/0720d2bf-8619-4ecb-a2eb-d2b806941539,
{st_dev=makedev(0, 23), st_ino=3164278, st_mode=S_IFREG|0744, st_nlink=1,
st_uid=40022, st_gid=400, st_blksize=262144, st_blocks=0, st_size=0,
st_atime=2010/07/13-15:02:01, st_mtime=2010/07/13-15:02:01,
st_ctime=2010/07/13-15:02:01}) = 0
8711 15:02:01.513393
unlink(Y_odloz/D8/D8_03_Ivet_98/0720d2bf-8619-4ecb-a2eb-d2b806941539) = 0
[...]
8711 15:02:01.514906 fcntl(12, F_SETLKW, {type=F_UNLCK, whence=SEEK_SET,
start=24956, len=1}) = 0
8711 15:02:01.515005 close(166)= 0
--
Lukáš Hejtmánek
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Re: [Samba] Oplocks
On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 01:13:56PM +0200, Lukas Hejtmanek wrote: I'm using the Samba server 3.0.33 that exports volume from a GPFS. The GPFS strongly dislikes unlinking files that are locked (resulting in permission denied) using fcntl F_SETLEASE. It seems that the Samba *sometimes* tries to unlink a file that is oplocked. Why? Is this a bug? Why it does not happen always but only sometimes? I have strace logs showing: You're sure that you are not exporting the same file space via two different nodes simultaneously? In theory, what you describe should not happen, at least not with current Samba. I'm not sure about ancient 3.0.33, but with current Samba this can only happen if you run Samba on the same file system from two different nodes. This is an invalid configuration, you need to use the clustered Samba with ctdb for that. Volker -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Re: [Samba] Oplocks
On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 03:40:32PM +0200, Volker Lendecke wrote: You're sure that you are not exporting the same file space via two different nodes simultaneously? In theory, what you describe should not happen, at least not with current Samba. I'm not sure about ancient 3.0.33, but with current Samba this can only happen if you run Samba on the same file system from two different nodes. This is an invalid configuration, you need to use the clustered Samba with ctdb for that. I have only one samba server for a GPFS volume so I should not need clustered Samba. Am I right? -- Lukáš Hejtmánek -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Re: [Samba] Oplocks
On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 04:25:33PM +0200, Lukas Hejtmanek wrote: On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 03:40:32PM +0200, Volker Lendecke wrote: You're sure that you are not exporting the same file space via two different nodes simultaneously? In theory, what you describe should not happen, at least not with current Samba. I'm not sure about ancient 3.0.33, but with current Samba this can only happen if you run Samba on the same file system from two different nodes. This is an invalid configuration, you need to use the clustered Samba with ctdb for that. I have only one samba server for a GPFS volume so I should not need clustered Samba. Am I right? Right. Then it's a bug. You might contact your RPM provider for support of this old Samba version. Volker -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Re: [Samba] Oplocks - when do they help
-Original Message- Use an Access .mdb file. Volker -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba Volker: I've been setting up Samba servers for years under the impression (delusion) that Samba can't handle multiple users on Access .mdb files correctly with op locks turned on. Has this changed in the 3.5.x branch? Best regards, Fred Fred Kienker AT4B Advanced Technologies for Business This transmission may contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the information contained herein (including any reliance thereon) is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you received this transmission in error, please immediately contact the sender and destroy the material in its entirety, whether in electronic or hard copy format. Thank you. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Re: [Samba] Oplocks - when do they help
On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 01:21:41PM -0400, Fred Kienker wrote: I've been setting up Samba servers for years under the impression (delusion) that Samba can't handle multiple users on Access .mdb files correctly with op locks turned on. Has this changed in the 3.5.x branch? Well, it should work the same way (good or bad) it does against a Windows server. Once a second opener comes in, the oplocks should be broken anyway. If I remember correctly in the past I have seen hints by Microsoft how to turn oplocks off in Windows server for shares that host Access files, so this problem might not be samba-specific and/or fixed in recent Windows. Volker -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Re: [Samba] Oplocks - when do they help
On 05/23/2010 10:11 AM, Volker Lendecke wrote: On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 01:21:41PM -0400, Fred Kienker wrote: I've been setting up Samba servers for years under the impression (delusion) that Samba can't handle multiple users on Access .mdb files correctly with op locks turned on. Has this changed in the 3.5.x branch? Well, it should work the same way (good or bad) it does against a Windows server. Once a second opener comes in, the oplocks should be broken anyway. If I remember correctly in the past I have seen hints by Microsoft how to turn oplocks off in Windows server for shares that host Access files, so this problem might not be samba-specific and/or fixed in recent Windows. I can remember having to vastly increase the record-locking features of Netware 4, if you had users using Access dbs, especially multi-user. That was back around 2000 or so, so record-locking issues with Access dbs have been around for a really long time ... -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
[Samba] Oplocks - when do they help
Hi, I googled around and the general wisdom seems to be that oplocks provide a performance gain if files are accessed by a single client at a time (that is, if the oplock does not break). What I can't figure out is what test can show this performance gain. I mean, theoretically, document-editing applications (Word,excel) save and load whole files and hence do not benefit from oplocks. Applications which do modify portions of a file usually flush buffers to maintain transactional integrity and hence should not benefit from oplocks either. So, how can I demonstrate the benefit of oplocks? Thanks, Uri. _ Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft’s powerful SPAM protection. https://signup.live.com/signup.aspx?id=60969 -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Re: [Samba] Oplocks - when do they help
On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 06:21:52PM +0300, Uri Simchoni wrote: I googled around and the general wisdom seems to be that oplocks provide a performance gain if files are accessed by a single client at a time (that is, if the oplock does not break). What I can't figure out is what test can show this performance gain. I mean, theoretically, document-editing applications (Word,excel) save and load whole files and hence do not benefit from oplocks. Applications which do modify portions of a file usually flush buffers to maintain transactional integrity and hence should not benefit from oplocks either. So, how can I demonstrate the benefit of oplocks? Use an Access .mdb file. Volker -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Re: [Samba] Oplocks - when do they help
So a single-user mdb benefits from oplocks, multi-user mdb suffers from oplocks, and applications that load/store whole files are indifferent to it? Thanks, Uri. Date: Sat, 22 May 2010 18:55:02 +0200 From: volker.lende...@sernet.de To: uri_simch...@hotmail.com CC: samba@lists.samba.org Subject: Re: [Samba] Oplocks - when do they help On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 06:21:52PM +0300, Uri Simchoni wrote: I googled around and the general wisdom seems to be that oplocks provide a performance gain if files are accessed by a single client at a time (that is, if the oplock does not break). What I can't figure out is what test can show this performance gain. I mean, theoretically, document-editing applications (Word,excel) save and load whole files and hence do not benefit from oplocks. Applications which do modify portions of a file usually flush buffers to maintain transactional integrity and hence should not benefit from oplocks either. So, how can I demonstrate the benefit of oplocks? Use an Access .mdb file. Volker _ Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service. https://signup.live.com/signup.aspx?id=60969 -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Re: [Samba] Oplocks - when do they help
On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 08:10:09PM +0300, Uri Simchoni wrote: So a single-user mdb benefits from oplocks, multi-user mdb suffers from oplocks, and applications that load/store whole files are indifferent to it? Not necessarily. I do know that MS Access suffers a lot without oplocks, I have seen a factor of 10 between an oplocked file and one without oplocks. This happened both against Windows and also against Samba. Everything else very much depends on the application. Without oplocks the Windows redirector (the compontent that makes d: come from the net) passes the Win32 API calls directly to the wire. So if the application decides to read a gigabyte large file byte by byte, then it will severely suffer from missing oplocks. With oplocks the Windows redirector will coalesce and pre-read much larger blocks. If your application at hand however at the win32 level already reads in large chunks, you will see not much difference. Can you take a look at your applications and see what they do? Volker -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Re: [Samba] Oplocks - when do they help
Date: Sat, 22 May 2010 19:21:32 +0200 From: volker.lende...@sernet.de To: uri_simch...@hotmail.com CC: samba@lists.samba.org Subject: Re: [Samba] Oplocks - when do they help On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 08:10:09PM +0300, Uri Simchoni wrote: So a single-user mdb benefits from oplocks, multi-user mdb suffers from oplocks, and applications that load/store whole files are indifferent to it? Not necessarily. I do know that MS Access suffers a lot without oplocks, I have seen a factor of 10 between an oplocked file and one without oplocks. This happened both against Windows and also against Samba. Everything else very much depends on the application. Without oplocks the Windows redirector (the compontent that makes d: come from the net) passes the Win32 API calls directly to the wire. So if the application decides to read a gigabyte large file byte by byte, then it will severely suffer from missing oplocks. With oplocks the Windows redirector will coalesce and pre-read much larger blocks. If your application at hand however at the win32 level already reads in large chunks, you will see not much difference. Can you take a look at your applications and see what they do? Volker What I'm really after is whether I should worry about oplocks in a Samba server or just turn them off. The reason for worrying is that I have the same file accessed using 2 shares: one normal and one that sits upon a special file system (linux fuse-based) that's really a layer above the normal file system. I cannot say what types of applications access these shares - they are for general use. What I understand is that I should make oplocks work if possible (I understand that for starters, that dev/inode pair through both access points should be the same). Thanks for the quick reply! Uri. _ Hotmail: Powerful Free email with security by Microsoft. https://signup.live.com/signup.aspx?id=60969 -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Re: RESOLVED: (sorta) Re: [Samba] Oplocks question
Toby Bluhm wrote: Terry Haley wrote: Actually Dan that helps a lot. It tells me the amount of work and effort it takes to bend this application in order to fit a mold it was not intended for. In the end, I decided to bite the bullet and make my PDC double as my primary file server. 45 mins of swapping an FC-nic, remapping the lvm's and reconfiguring the smb.conf in order to make this a non-issue and prevent more complexity proliferation is well worth it. It's a shame it doesn't handle remote file systems more elegantly. Here are the steps: configure the 2nd samba server as a client, join it to the domain, add a dfs enabled share, dfs enable the PDC, create the filesystem link(s), done. Should take 5 minutes. True. But keep in mind that Mac OS X machines won't follow DFS links. At least until 10.5.6. -Remy -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
[Samba] Oplocks question
What have people found with oplocks in the realm of really saving time? Is it something that's always good to have in an environment where two files being accessed simultaneously is rare? My shared volume is an NFS on a remote server. Just curious what folks have experienced. Terry The information in this e-mail is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you believe this e-mail was sent to you in error and the e-mail contains patient information, please contact the Partners Compliance HelpLine at http://www.partners.org/complianceline . If the e-mail was sent to you in error but does not contain patient information, please contact the sender and properly dispose of the e-mail. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Re: [Samba] Oplocks question
I've had hit and miss problems with locks on sharing NFS mounted SMB shares. Works good with some NFS servers, not well wither others. I was told in this list that it's not a supported samba config, so I gave up trying to reliably use them. Dan Terry Haley wrote: What have people found with oplocks in the realm of really saving time? Is it something that's always good to have in an environment where two files being accessed simultaneously is rare? My shared volume is an NFS on a remote server. Just curious what folks have experienced. Terry The information in this e-mail is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you believe this e-mail was sent to you in error and the e-mail contains patient information, please contact the Partners Compliance HelpLine at http://www.partners.org/complianceline . If the e-mail was sent to you in error but does not contain patient information, please contact the sender and properly dispose of the e-mail. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Re: [Samba] Oplocks question
Hmm, so the thing would be to convert my NFS server to use samba? and setup an smbfs on the PDC? On Jun 9, 2009, at 11:48 AM, Daniel Bourque wrote: I've had hit and miss problems with locks on sharing NFS mounted SMB shares. Works good with some NFS servers, not well wither others. I was told in this list that it's not a supported samba config, so I gave up trying to reliably use them. Dan Terry Haley wrote: What have people found with oplocks in the realm of really saving time? Is it something that's always good to have in an environment where two files being accessed simultaneously is rare? My shared volume is an NFS on a remote server. Just curious what folks have experienced. Terry The information in this e-mail is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you believe this e-mail was sent to you in error and the e-mail contains patient information, please contact the Partners Compliance HelpLine at http://www.partners.org/complianceline . If the e-mail was sent to you in error but does not contain patient information, please contact the sender and properly dispose of the e-mail. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba Terry Haley, Ph.D. Systems Admin, Microarray Core Dana-Farber Cancer Institute 21-27 Burlington Ave. / B466 Boston, MA 02215 email: terry_ha...@dfci.harvard.edu tel: 617-632-6043 fax: 617-632-5697 web: http://chip.dfci.harvard.edu -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Re: [Samba] Oplocks question
On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 11:59:11AM -0400, Terry Haley wrote: Hmm, so the thing would be to convert my NFS server to use samba? and setup an smbfs on the PDC? No, you should not re-export *any* file system you imported from some network file system. You should direct your clients at the original file server holding the storage, if necessary via msdfs redirects. Volker pgpAYMrDygSk3.pgp Description: PGP signature -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Re: [Samba] Oplocks question
So reading this, I assume that noone uses samba as a simple authentication/gateway to network shares for windows machines. Since you are limited to sharing local volumes on the PDC? How would I go about setting up a passthrough for my machines to the actual fileserver? Do I setup clients on the file server? do I have samba point them with credentials to the file server? On Jun 9, 2009, at 12:16 PM, Volker Lendecke wrote: On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 11:59:11AM -0400, Terry Haley wrote: Hmm, so the thing would be to convert my NFS server to use samba? and setup an smbfs on the PDC? No, you should not re-export *any* file system you imported from some network file system. You should direct your clients at the original file server holding the storage, if necessary via msdfs redirects. Volker The information in this e-mail is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you believe this e-mail was sent to you in error and the e-mail contains patient information, please contact the Partners Compliance HelpLine at http://www.partners.org/complianceline . If the e-mail was sent to you in error but does not contain patient information, please contact the sender and properly dispose of the e-mail. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Re: [Samba] Oplocks question
I keep an old RH7 VM running samba as a gateway to NFS shares for our older Mac boxes , because I was having problems with the ressource fork on newer implementations of samba. everything works perfect with newer versions of samba, I experience lock issues accessing the same NFS shares. So I also have samba running on ever NFS servers, and drives are mapped directly to the server were the file system is locally mounted. As Volker said, look into msfds. It will allow you to point your clients to one SMB server and access SMB shares off other servers in a transparent way. You'll still need to install Samba on the NFS file servers you want to acesss. hope this helps Dan Terry Haley wrote: So reading this, I assume that noone uses samba as a simple authentication/gateway to network shares for windows machines. Since you are limited to sharing local volumes on the PDC? How would I go about setting up a passthrough for my machines to the actual fileserver? Do I setup clients on the file server? do I have samba point them with credentials to the file server? On Jun 9, 2009, at 12:16 PM, Volker Lendecke wrote: On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 11:59:11AM -0400, Terry Haley wrote: Hmm, so the thing would be to convert my NFS server to use samba? and setup an smbfs on the PDC? No, you should not re-export *any* file system you imported from some network file system. You should direct your clients at the original file server holding the storage, if necessary via msdfs redirects. Volker The information in this e-mail is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you believe this e-mail was sent to you in error and the e-mail contains patient information, please contact the Partners Compliance HelpLine at http://www.partners.org/complianceline . If the e-mail was sent to you in error but does not contain patient information, please contact the sender and properly dispose of the e-mail. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
RESOLVED: (sorta) Re: [Samba] Oplocks question
Actually Dan that helps a lot. It tells me the amount of work and effort it takes to bend this application in order to fit a mold it was not intended for. In the end, I decided to bite the bullet and make my PDC double as my primary file server. 45 mins of swapping an FC-nic, remapping the lvm's and reconfiguring the smb.conf in order to make this a non-issue and prevent more complexity proliferation is well worth it. It's a shame it doesn't handle remote file systems more elegantly. Thank you, everyone, for your comments and advice. Terry On Jun 9, 2009, at 1:36 PM, Daniel Bourque wrote: I keep an old RH7 VM running samba as a gateway to NFS shares for our older Mac boxes , because I was having problems with the ressource fork on newer implementations of samba. everything works perfect with newer versions of samba, I experience lock issues accessing the same NFS shares. So I also have samba running on ever NFS servers, and drives are mapped directly to the server were the file system is locally mounted. As Volker said, look into msfds. It will allow you to point your clients to one SMB server and access SMB shares off other servers in a transparent way. You'll still need to install Samba on the NFS file servers you want to acesss. hope this helps Dan Terry Haley wrote: So reading this, I assume that noone uses samba as a simple authentication/gateway to network shares for windows machines. Since you are limited to sharing local volumes on the PDC? How would I go about setting up a passthrough for my machines to the actual fileserver? Do I setup clients on the file server? do I have samba point them with credentials to the file server? On Jun 9, 2009, at 12:16 PM, Volker Lendecke wrote: On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 11:59:11AM -0400, Terry Haley wrote: Hmm, so the thing would be to convert my NFS server to use samba? and setup an smbfs on the PDC? No, you should not re-export *any* file system you imported from some network file system. You should direct your clients at the original file server holding the storage, if necessary via msdfs redirects. Volker The information in this e-mail is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you believe this e-mail was sent to you in error and the e-mail contains patient information, please contact the Partners Compliance HelpLine at http://www.partners.org/complianceline . If the e-mail was sent to you in error but does not contain patient information, please contact the sender and properly dispose of the e-mail. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Re: RESOLVED: (sorta) Re: [Samba] Oplocks question
Terry Haley wrote: Actually Dan that helps a lot. It tells me the amount of work and effort it takes to bend this application in order to fit a mold it was not intended for. In the end, I decided to bite the bullet and make my PDC double as my primary file server. 45 mins of swapping an FC-nic, remapping the lvm's and reconfiguring the smb.conf in order to make this a non-issue and prevent more complexity proliferation is well worth it. It's a shame it doesn't handle remote file systems more elegantly. Here are the steps: configure the 2nd samba server as a client, join it to the domain, add a dfs enabled share, dfs enable the PDC, create the filesystem link(s), done. Should take 5 minutes. -- tkb -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Re: RESOLVED: (sorta) Re: [Samba] Oplocks question
Clearly some one who hasn't worked with Samba for that long. Theres no shame about Samba, it does what it does well, PDC and SMB sharing and has saved my a#% several times. I never chimed in as I didn't and still don't follow the thread. You can stack as many disk protocol sharing services as you want on a single box, but if you want to re export from one to another, sounds to me like you are very junior in the network fs space. As for MSDFS, man that sh$# sux. If you require clustering of that nature, start doing an RFQ from NetApp or BlueArc, etc... even look on eBay and actual auctions. My buddy picked up a few slightly used NetApps for $3.5K each at 4TB. - Brian On Jun 9, 2009, at 12:29 PM, Terry Haley wrote: Actually Dan that helps a lot. It tells me the amount of work and effort it takes to bend this application in order to fit a mold it was not intended for. In the end, I decided to bite the bullet and make my PDC double as my primary file server. 45 mins of swapping an FC-nic, remapping the lvm's and reconfiguring the smb.conf in order to make this a non-issue and prevent more complexity proliferation is well worth it. It's a shame it doesn't handle remote file systems more elegantly. Thank you, everyone, for your comments and advice. Terry On Jun 9, 2009, at 1:36 PM, Daniel Bourque wrote: I keep an old RH7 VM running samba as a gateway to NFS shares for our older Mac boxes , because I was having problems with the ressource fork on newer implementations of samba. everything works perfect with newer versions of samba, I experience lock issues accessing the same NFS shares. So I also have samba running on ever NFS servers, and drives are mapped directly to the server were the file system is locally mounted. As Volker said, look into msfds. It will allow you to point your clients to one SMB server and access SMB shares off other servers in a transparent way. You'll still need to install Samba on the NFS file servers you want to acesss. hope this helps Dan Terry Haley wrote: So reading this, I assume that noone uses samba as a simple authentication/gateway to network shares for windows machines. Since you are limited to sharing local volumes on the PDC? How would I go about setting up a passthrough for my machines to the actual fileserver? Do I setup clients on the file server? do I have samba point them with credentials to the file server? On Jun 9, 2009, at 12:16 PM, Volker Lendecke wrote: On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 11:59:11AM -0400, Terry Haley wrote: Hmm, so the thing would be to convert my NFS server to use samba? and setup an smbfs on the PDC? No, you should not re-export *any* file system you imported from some network file system. You should direct your clients at the original file server holding the storage, if necessary via msdfs redirects. Volker The information in this e-mail is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you believe this e-mail was sent to you in error and the e-mail contains patient information, please contact the Partners Compliance HelpLine at http://www.partners.org/complianceline . If the e-mail was sent to you in error but does not contain patient information, please contact the sender and properly dispose of the e-mail. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
[samba] oplocks
Hello, I would like to share file with samba on leopard server. I use samba for this and the file sharing works fine. I enable oplocks too and I have a problem. Two user can open and modify the same file. I read many things but for me oplocks is used to lock file for one user ? If somebody can help me please or I you have information. Thanks -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] oplocks OS X
Hello I enable oplocks on samba server and testparm send me no error. But when 2 users open the same file there is nothing like File in Use (i have seen this on a forum). All client use OS X, normally samba works fine on it. If someone have an idea Thanks -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] oplocks OS X
2008/7/30 Aquaserver [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hello I enable oplocks on samba server and testparm send me no error. But when 2 users open the same file there is nothing like File in Use (i have seen this on a forum). All client use OS X, normally samba works fine on it. oplocks aren't locks in the sense of you have one and I don't get access. they are a permission to cache. If an application holds an oplock on a file, that will not prevent another application opening the same file. -- James Peach | [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] samba oplocks
Hello I've just installed a samba server on a OS X server. I enable oplocks and it's good for rtf, odt or doc. But with iWork files it's very strange, iWork saves files in folder and oplocks didn't work. If someone has already do it or has an idea :) -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] oplocks
Hello I've just installed a samba server on a OS X server. I enable oplocks and it's good for rtf, odt or doc. But with iWork files it's very strange, iWork saves files in folder and oplocks didn't work. If someone has already do it or has an idea :) -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: samba oplocks not breaking
Volker Lendecke wrote: If both processes are Samba, the kernel oplock break mechanism should not be involved at all. At least it is supposed to work so that the oplock break is done with messages between the smbds. Kernel oplocks are only for interop with NFS and local unix processes. So if you're seeing kernel oplock breaks for files just held by Samba, Samba has a bug. If you can reproduce it, please file a bug at bugzilla.samba.org and upload a debug level 10 log of both smbd processes involved. Please also with debug hires timestamps = yes. I am not quite clear on this. It would appear other Unix processes and other Samba processes are denied access to the file: 2008/06/19 15:24:08, 0] smbd/oplock.c:oplock_timeout_handler(351) Oplock break failed for file cur/config.xml -- replying anyway [2008/06/19 15:24:51, 0] smbd/oplock.c:oplock_timeout_handler(351) Oplock break failed for file cur/profiles.xml -- replying anyway [2008/06/19 15:25:21, 0] smbd/oplock.c:oplock_timeout_handler(351) Oplock break failed for file cur/profiles/vpac.xml -- replying anyway [2008/06/19 15:25:51, 0] smbd/oplock.c:oplock_timeout_handler(351) Oplock break failed for file cur/hosts.xml -- replying anyway [2008/06/19 15:26:21, 0] smbd/oplock.c:oplock_timeout_handler(351) Oplock break failed for file cur/hosts/vpac.xml -- replying anyway [2008/06/19 15:26:51, 0] smbd/oplock.c:oplock_timeout_handler(351) Oplock break failed for file cur/packages.xml -- replying anyway [2008/06/19 15:27:21, 0] smbd/oplock.c:oplock_timeout_handler(351) Oplock break failed for file cur/packages/winscp.xml -- replying anyway Something strange going on here. Yes, you are right, I probably will need to reproduce this with a higher level of debugging. Will try that now. In one of my other messages I quoted the kernel stack trace, but I have been told that cannot be trusted; it could be using old data. Brian May -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: samba oplocks not breaking
Brian May wrote: Yes, you are right, I probably will need to reproduce this with a higher level of debugging. Will try that now. In one of my other messages I quoted the kernel stack trace, but I have been told that cannot be trusted; it could be using old data. https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5557 Brian May -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] samba oplocks not breaking
On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 02:09:22PM +1000, Brian May wrote: I am having (weird) issues with XFS, in that open(...) on certain files takes 45 seconds to return. After the file has been opened, the next file in the same directory takes 45 seconds. If the file was recently opened it returns immediately. I have raised this on several mailing lists, see: http://lists.luv.asn.au/wws/arc/luv-main/2008-06/msg00143.html http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2008-06/msg00210.html http://www.archivum.info/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/2008-06/msg00337.html So far it would appear to be Samba is not releasing the oplock when another process tries to break it. If both processes are Samba, the kernel oplock break mechanism should not be involved at all. At least it is supposed to work so that the oplock break is done with messages between the smbds. Kernel oplocks are only for interop with NFS and local unix processes. So if you're seeing kernel oplock breaks for files just held by Samba, Samba has a bug. If you can reproduce it, please file a bug at bugzilla.samba.org and upload a debug level 10 log of both smbd processes involved. Please also with debug hires timestamps = yes. Volker pgp3N7Rau6C9G.pgp Description: PGP signature -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] samba oplocks not breaking
Hello, I am having (weird) issues with XFS, in that open(...) on certain files takes 45 seconds to return. After the file has been opened, the next file in the same directory takes 45 seconds. If the file was recently opened it returns immediately. I have raised this on several mailing lists, see: http://lists.luv.asn.au/wws/arc/luv-main/2008-06/msg00143.html http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2008-06/msg00210.html http://www.archivum.info/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/2008-06/msg00337.html So far it would appear to be Samba is not releasing the oplock when another process tries to break it. I am not entirely convinced this is Samba's fault: http://www.archivum.info/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/2008-06/msg00342.html However, somebody suggested I contact Samba people just in case. Any ideas? Thanks Brian May -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] oplocks causing more trouble than benefit ?
Hi everybody, my setup is 1 fileserver running samba 3.0.22 on Gentoo Linux, and about 15 clients, some of which are XP and some W2K. On some PCs we have Outlook 2000, and we store each user's outlook.pst file in a private folder on the fileserver. One of the W2K clients had hardware problems that caused it to freeze once in a while. Everytime this happened, the user would restart the machine and everything was fine except Outlook complained it could not open the personal folders file because it was already in use by another user (or process, I don't remember the error message exactly). smbstatus showed in fact that the smbd process the user was connected to _before_ her PC freezed was still holding a DENY_WRITE lock on the outlook.pst file. One solution was to manually kill that smbd process. While this worked almost every time (although it was really annoying because that PC's hardware failures were becoming frequent), one day I had to restart smbd entirely (or was it the entire server ?). To make a long story short, I searched the docs and finally found that the problem was I had oplocks enabled in the smb.conf file. Disabling it solved the issue entirely. The conf file now reads something like: [NetworkDrive] (snip other options) oplocks = no While trying to solve this issue I've read quite some docs about the oplocks feature, and I got the impression that while they may improve performance, they are very complicated and rely on a not so robust mechanism. I didn't notice any slowdown after disabling oplocks, but this might be because our network and fileserver are underloaded. So my question is: why are oplocks on by default ? Wouldn't it be safer to turn them off by default and specify under which circumstances they might give the performance improvements that justify their adoption ? Thanks in advance. -- Marcello Romani Responsabile IT Ottotecnica s.r.l. http://www.ottotecnica.com -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] Oplocks not taking place at all unless fake oplocks = yes - Update
I've modified the contention limit in attempt to troubleshoot this, thinking that perhaps the client may be requesting multiple oplocks for whatever reason. The client is still not getting an oplock without specifying 'fake oplocks = yes'. I'm open to any ideas for troubleshooting. I've also checked to see if oplocks are explicitly disabled on the client, and they are not. I do experience this with more than one client as well, a Windows 2000 Professional client, and a Windows XP Professional client (inside a VMWare session). TIA - Chris Wagner -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Chris Wagner Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2006 8:54 AM To: samba@lists.samba.org Subject: [Samba] Oplocks not taking place at all unless fake oplocks = yes Hi folks I'm running two Samba servers. One is on Ubuntu 5.10 (samba-3.0.14a-6ubuntu1), the other is SuSE Linux Enterprise Server (samba-3.0.20b-3.4). The Ubuntu box is on my local network, and the SLES box is across a WAN with an intervening WAFS appliance with TCP acceleration. Neither set-up seems to grant an oplock to the client unless I turn on 'fake oplocks'. I've set 'oplocks = yes' and 'locking = yes' explicitly in my config file to no avail. Obviously, 'fake oplocks' isn't something I want to turn on in a production environment. I'm looking for some help in narrowing down where the problem lies. Thanks in advance. -- Christopher Wagner Amy's Kitchen - http://www.amys.com/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sr. Systems Administrator -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Oplocks not taking place at all unless fake oplocks = yes
Hi folks I'm running two Samba servers. One is on Ubuntu 5.10 (samba-3.0.14a-6ubuntu1), the other is SuSE Linux Enterprise Server (samba-3.0.20b-3.4). The Ubuntu box is on my local network, and the SLES box is across a WAN with an intervening WAFS appliance with TCP acceleration. Neither set-up seems to grant an oplock to the client unless I turn on 'fake oplocks'. I've set 'oplocks = yes' and 'locking = yes' explicitly in my config file to no avail. Obviously, 'fake oplocks' isn't something I want to turn on in a production environment. I'm looking for some help in narrowing down where the problem lies. Thanks in advance. -- Christopher Wagner Amy's Kitchen - http://www.amys.com/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sr. Systems Administrator -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] Oplocks break and no route to host problems
Thanks Volker, I've tried this day to put veto oplocks in (global) section onto .DAT and .POL files and into netlogon and profiles section I've put : locking = No seems better in my logs now. I just still have antothers little pb. that I will post a mail in this list next to this one. Xavier Volker Lendecke a écrit : On Mon, Apr 17, 2006 at 01:44:31PM +0200, xavier wrote: I' m experiencing many problems with oplocks break failure and Error: no route to host.essentialy onto \profiles dir and \netlogon dir. So My clients cannot update many files on the SAMBA/PDC and cannot read the NTconfig.pol file to update their policies. I have many PC that are old computers with Win2k and have an Antivirus and are slower machines ... This problem less occurs on newer machines. I have seen searching the web that I may disable oplock (oplock = False) into the smb.conf and level 2 oplock too. I don' t now if my default configuration have this parameter set cause I don't see it into my smb.conf. But perhaps I can play with a delay parameter that I could but bigger, is it possible ? The only thing that makes sense here is to completely disable oplocks, although this does not solve your real problem. 99% this is your network, maybe some broken switch, more likely problems with network card drivers either on clients or the server. Volker -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] Oplocks break and no route to host problems
On Tue, Apr 18, 2006 at 11:48:42PM +0200, xavier wrote: I've tried this day to put veto oplocks in (global) section onto .DAT and .POL files and into netlogon and profiles section I've put : locking = No seems better in my logs now. locking=no is not a good idea for general use, this might lead to data corruption. And if you want to disable oplocks, the option oplocks=no would be more appropriate. And, as I said, you should _REALLY_ check your network infrastructure like half/full duplex settings, current driver versions and so on. Volker pgpTrLSSFtjc6.pgp Description: PGP signature -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Oplocks break and no route to host problems
Hi, I' m experiencing many problems with oplocks break failure and Error: no route to host.essentialy onto \profiles dir and \netlogon dir. So My clients cannot update many files on the SAMBA/PDC and cannot read the NTconfig.pol file to update their policies. I have many PC that are old computers with Win2k and have an Antivirus and are slower machines ... This problem less occurs on newer machines. I have seen searching the web that I may disable oplock (oplock = False) into the smb.conf and level 2 oplock too. I don' t now if my default configuration have this parameter set cause I don't see it into my smb.conf. But perhaps I can play with a delay parameter that I could but bigger, is it possible ? I would like to now if there is a solution to test in a good way this problem. thanks My configuration is : Samba 3.0.20 under Linux Mandrake 9.2 compiled with acl and quotas support under an XFS filesystem working great. recycle and vscan/clamav modules compiled with but not enabled on all shares (disabled onto \netlogon and \profiles) Xavier -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] Oplocks break and no route to host problems
On Mon, Apr 17, 2006 at 01:44:31PM +0200, xavier wrote: I' m experiencing many problems with oplocks break failure and Error: no route to host.essentialy onto \profiles dir and \netlogon dir. So My clients cannot update many files on the SAMBA/PDC and cannot read the NTconfig.pol file to update their policies. I have many PC that are old computers with Win2k and have an Antivirus and are slower machines ... This problem less occurs on newer machines. I have seen searching the web that I may disable oplock (oplock = False) into the smb.conf and level 2 oplock too. I don' t now if my default configuration have this parameter set cause I don't see it into my smb.conf. But perhaps I can play with a delay parameter that I could but bigger, is it possible ? The only thing that makes sense here is to completely disable oplocks, although this does not solve your real problem. 99% this is your network, maybe some broken switch, more likely problems with network card drivers either on clients or the server. Volker pgpFFc5w6rzGK.pgp Description: PGP signature -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] oplocks general question
Hi all, When oplocks = no, I still see the entries below in log.smbd. Clients are XP Pro SP2. Is this a harmless entry? I had another site with the same config, but was previously getting corruption. On some other sites with non SP2 machines I do not see any oplock entries in the log.smbd. [2006/01/25 18:30:11, 3] smbd/oplock.c:init_oplocks(1211) open_oplock_ipc: opening loopback UDP socket. [2006/01/25 18:30:11, 3] smbd/oplock.c:init_oplocks(1242) open_oplock ipc: pid = 8570, global_oplock_port = 2144 Thanks very much guys Greg -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] oplocks and Excel
I have a small business client with a new samba file server. It's CentOS 4.2 and Samba samba-3.0.10-1.4E.2. When they save open Excel files from Windows, they are prompted to overwrite the existing file. I mean, when they click the little disk icon or use Ctrl-S or File--Save. Excel would normally just write over the file, not check with an are you sure? prompt. But that's what they get. So I looked into this a little, and although I can't find anyone with this specific issue, I do see that newer versions of Excel create a bit of file-locking trouble for samba. Now, I don't know enough to know whether my problem has anything to do with file-locking, but it seems likely enough. So I have two questions: 1) I find very conflicting opinions on this list, and across the net, about whether to leave oplocks and level2 oplocks on. I have never had to touch them in the past, but most of the places where I've used samba have old versions of Excel and/or OOo. If this place does not use much MS-Access, can I turn off oplocks? Might I expect doing so to help with this prompt-to-overwrite problem? 2) More generally, has anyone else seen this problem before and been able to do anything about it? Thanks, Matt -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] oplocks and Excel
On 1/25/06, Matt Morgan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When they save open Excel files from Windows, they are prompted to overwrite the existing file. I mean, when they click the little disk icon or use Ctrl-S or File--Save. Excel would normally just write over the file, not check with an are you sure? prompt. But that's what they get. This bug was fixed in Samba 3.0.11, IIRC. If you don't want to upgrade Samba, you should be able to get rid of the message by setting your Excel workbooks for sharing. (Under Excel's Tools menu, choose Share Workbook.) Microsoft's knowledgebase also describes the issue at http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/324491/en-us?; I remember trying the fix they suggest there, but I can't remember if it worked or not. Regarding your oplocks question, we've left them on for everything but Outlook .pst files (which sometimes had locking errors with oplocks enabled) and have had no problems that I'm aware of, but others are probably more qualified to speak on this. Josh Kelley -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] oplocks
On 11/9/05, Dennis Barch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm trying to disable oplocks on our system. Is it sufficient to set: oplocks = no level2 oplocks = no or do I need to also set kernel oplocks = no Changing kernel oplocks should be unnecessary; the smb.conf man page makes it sound like kernel oplocks only alters the behavior of oplocks, so if oplocks are off, it will have no effect. Josh Kelley -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] oplocks
Hello, I'm trying to disable oplocks on our system. Is it sufficient to set: oplocks = no level2 oplocks = no or do I need to also set kernel oplocks = no ? What would be the effect of keeping kernel oplocks = yes if the first two are disabled. running a testparm shows that this is set to yes by default Thanks in advance, Dennis _ Dont just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] oplocks problem, and clarification
Hi, I have been having problem with use of database files kept on some of the shares... there is evident performance issues. I want to globaly diable any oplocks which are being enforce by default. Is there a parameter or suggestion ? Regards -- Sanjay Upadhyay http://saneax.blogspot.com -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] oplocks, QuickBooks (Samba 3)
Sorry, didn't mean for that to go to you personally, must remember to choose reply all and remove personal emails ;o) I am still curious, I have this for my quickbooks share: [accting] comment = Accounting Volume path = /accting writeable = yes valid users = list of valid users oplocks = no level2 oplocks = no force group = group force user = user inherit permissions = yes create mask = 0771 directory mask = 0771 vfs object = recycle:recycle recycle:repository = .deleted recycle:keeptree = Yes recycle:touch = Yes recycle:versions = Yes Is there anything in this config you would suggest changing/removing/adding? Liz Ryan I am continuing to have issues with my users and their Quickbooks application as well as a MS Access shared database. Can you share with me your setup? Are your users able to use Quickbooks on a Samba share without corrupting the databases? Sure, must make the following is in the share dedicated to quickbooks: oplocks = no Works fine then, but this disables some caching which will slow down other files shared in the same directory. For now, I'm just creating a [quickbooks] share just with Quickbooks inside of it. Also, I would re-post this question on the list... not just to me. It demonstrates other people are having issues and reinforces my question. I haven't used any previous versions of Samba, and we're on Samb 3.0.14 a RedHat ES installation. Thanks, appreciate any feedback you can provide! Liz -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] oplocks, QuickBooks (Samba 3)
Hi there, Can somebody please explain to me why Samba 3 requires 'oplocks = no' on shares for programs like Quickbooks to operate properly with multiple users, where Samba 2 didn't? Without this option, Quickbooks will complain about file corruption when a second user tries to open a file. This option, however, makes the particular share that the option is present in _very_ slow accessing from Windows clients. Currently, Quickbooks is getting its own share as a workaround (previously, some setups may have had Quickbooks in a subfolder of another share). I'm finding it _very_ difficult to convince some people to upgrade (from Samba 2 on Debian Woody, to Samba 3 on Ubuntu Hoary) when to them, it seems a step backwards - It works fine shared from Windows. Is there perhaps another way around this problem, or something fixed in a later version of Samba that is present in Ubuntu Hoary (3.0.10-1ubuntu3)? Seeking advice, R -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Oplocks for veto'd files (Samba 2.2.8a on SuSE 9.0)
In my smb.conf file, I've got the following section: [homes] comment = Home Directories valid users = %S guest ok = no read only = No create mask = 0640 directory mask = 0750 browseable = No veto oplock files = /*.mdb/*.MDB/*.pst/*.PST/ And yet, in the syslog, I'm still getting these... Mar 10 10:22:34 riffraff smbd[25404]: [2005/03/10 10:22:34, 0] smbd/oplock.c:oplock_break(797) Mar 10 10:22:34 riffraff smbd[25404]: oplock_break: receive_smb timed out after 30 seconds. Mar 10 10:22:34 riffraff smbd[25404]: oplock_break failed for file mail/outlook.pst (dev = 3a02, inode = 112407, file_id = 3). Mar 10 10:22:34 riffraff smbd[25404]: [2005/03/10 10:22:34, 0] smbd/oplock.c:oplock_break(869) Mar 10 10:22:34 riffraff smbd[25404]: oplock_break: client failure in oplock break in file mail/outlook.pst Any idea why the oplocks are still being performed? (Pardon the two messages; I think these are two separate issues, and so want to track them separately.) -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Oplocks with concurrent access from same client
I am observing the following behaviour with samba-2.2.12 (Yes, I know, it's old) and MS-Access XP on a Win2K box: The client opens a .mdb file and gets a level2 oplock. Then it opens the .mdb file again and loses the oplock (at least I assume it does: The server sends an SMBlockingX request to the client and waits for another SMBlockingX request from the client before sending the Reply to the SMBntcreateX request). Then the client closes the second file handle to the .mdb file and continues to use the first one, which has now lost the oplock, so there is a lot of network traffic and the query is rather slow. My question is, is this the expected behaviour from the server? Could the server, if a file is opened a second time from the same client, assume that it is the client's responsibility to keep data in its cache of the file consistent, and keep the oplock (and maybe even grant it on the second filehandle, too)? Or to ask the same question from a different viewpoint: On the client system, who is managing oplocks and caching? The application or the OS? If it's the application, the server can clearly not assume that two different filehandles will maintain a consistent state of the file (they may belong to different processes). If it's the OS, it would at least be technically feasible to maintain a common cache on the client side for all file handles, and if Windows does this, it would be possible for the server to take advantage of this. Finally, if the server can make this optimization, does a newer version of Samba (3.x or 4.x) do it? hp -- _ | Peter J. Holzer | If the code is old but the problem is new |_|_) | Sysadmin WSR / LUGA | then the code probably isn't the problem. | | | [EMAIL PROTECTED]| __/ | http://www.hjp.at/ | -- Tim Bunce on dbi-users, 2004-11-05 pgpkgIcx2Ck5C.pgp Description: PGP signature -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] oplocks w2k excel
Hi, I have the problem: Clients with W2K and Office 2k try to open a xls-file on a samba share. It worked fine until a few weeks ago. The few weeks because there were holidays, our clerks wern't working, but I did some maintenance on IT equipment (Yes: my fault! so I am in great distress. I did my best to convince the workers, they did something wrong, but they don't believe me, can You imagine?). Now there are the following results possible (ordered by occurence): 1. Can open, but it takes a long time, can change, but cannot save, not even with a new name in the same folder or anywhere on the share, 2. Cannot open at all, Excel freezes (Maybe the same than 1, but it takes more time I can spare waiting for 3. Opens at once, You can change and save to the same file Number 3 was happening when I opened the file saved it to local HD-folder copied it with Explorer to a new directory on the samba share Then it worked once. Additional attempts produced 1 or 2. The copy on the local filesystem works fine. When I watched the account with smbstatus | grep pid I had the impression that when Excel tried to open there file there was first: one entry saying that the user had opened the desired file in DENY_NONE RW mode, second: there was a few seconds later the same entry as in first still present, but additionally a second one, saying the client had opened the same file in RO mode, and third: when excel was finally ready, showing the file and You were able to edit, the process for the client had a new ID, the old one was gone and there were no files open at all. It is the first time I tried to watch via smbstatus whats going on, so I do ot know, wether this behavior is normal or show something significant. Afterwards I have the following entries in samba.log.%m: [2004/08/26 17:18:33, 0] smbd/oplock.c:oplock_break(807) oplock_break: receive_smb timed out after 30 seconds. oplock_break failed for file sichLohnEHW/Controlling/km_kst.xls (dev = 3a00, inode = 1695812, file_id = 20). [2004/08/26 17:18:33, 0] smbd/oplock.c:oplock_break(879) oplock_break: client failure in oplock break in file sichLohnEHW/ Controlling/km_kst.xls [2004/08/26 17:19:35, 1] smbd/service.c:close_cnum(887) gh571 (172.23.2.224) closed connection to service EHWLohn [2004/08/26 17:19:35, 1] smbd/service.c:close_cnum(887) gh571 (172.23.2.224) closed connection to service cdrom2 [2004/08/26 17:19:35, 1] smbd/service.c:close_cnum(887) gh571 (172.23.2.224) closed connection to service stahle [2004/08/26 17:19:35, 1] smbd/service.c:close_cnum(887) gh571 (172.23.2.224) closed connection to service hne2_unix1 [2004/08/26 17:19:35, 1] smbd/service.c:close_cnum(887) gh571 (172.23.2.224) closed connection to service Marktplatz [2004/08/26 17:19:35, 1] smbd/service.c:close_cnum(887) gh571 (172.23.2.224) closed connection to service Marktplatz [2004/08/26 17:19:35, 1] smbd/service.c:close_cnum(887) gh571 (172.23.2.224) closed connection to service EHWLohn [2004/08/26 17:19:36, 1] smbd/service.c:make_connection_snum(705) gh571 (172.23.2.224) connect to service EHWLohn initially as user klaus (uid=510, gid=109) (pid 14179) [2004/08/26 17:19:36, 1] smbd/service.c:make_connection_snum(705) The files are located directly on the samba-server, a lvm-volume I increased from 100GB to 250GB, there are odbc-connections in this xls-files to txt-based datas on a nfs-volume from an DEC/OSF1 ( yes, a little bit in the ages). But I tried to copy the data-files to the samba server, but there was no change. I use SuSE 8.1 professional, samba 3.01, this is unchanged since several month, to clients I did the latest MS - update for win2k. I also connected the clients to the domain, my samba is master controller. My smb.conf (partially): ; [global] workgroup = xyz guest account = nobody server string = xyz4 ; keep alive = 20 os level = 64 kernel oplocks = no security = user hide dot files = yes domain master = yes prefered master = yes local master = yes dos charset = 850 add user script = /usr/sbin/addsmbuser.sh %u add group script = /usr/sbin/smbgradd.sh %g add printer command = /usr/bin/addprinter.sh log level = 1 log file = /usr/local/samba/var/samba.log.%m max log size = 50 encrypt passwords = yes printing = LPRNG printcap name = /etc/printcap load printers = yes printer admin = @ntadmin socket options = SO_KEEPALIVE IPTOS_LOWDELAY TCP_NODELAY map to guest = Bad User interfaces = 192.168.1.4/255.255.255.0 wins support = yes name resolve order = hosts wins bcast dns proxy = yes logon script =%U.bat domain logons = yes [netlogon] path = /var/lib/samba/netlogon browseable = no read only = yes public = no [homes] comment = Heimatverzeichnis browseable = no read only = no create mode = 0750 veto files = /.*/ The share with the problems on [EHWLohn] comment = Lohn-Buchhaltung path
[Samba] Oplocks and Office 2000 SP3
Hi, I have serious problems to manage oplocks on Samba Share. Some clients have been installed Office 2000 SP3 + Windows XP SP1; they aren't working because Word+ Excel save files only read-only when reopen the file and I try to save. If use Wordpad or something else, It'll works fine. on the smb.conf: level2 oplocks = yes oplocks = yes veto oplock files = /*.doc/*.xls/*.mdb/*.DOC/*.XLS/*.MDB/*.TMP/*.tmp/ I read official samba how-to but never happened when changed the parameters: EnableOplocks, ecc... on regedit register. I disabled kernel oplocks, oplocks and level2 oplocks but it doesn't work. Have you any idea? ___ Umberto Zanatta linuxDidattica tel: +39 (335) 54 71 385 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] web: http://linuxdidattica.org ___ -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] Samba - Oplocks = no
On Thu, May 13, 2004 at 05:44:47AM -0700, Malcolm Baldridge wrote: What I always wonder though is whether or not these oplock problems plague Windows NT/2000 file servers as well, or if it's just an achilles heel within Samba. Yes they plague Windows fileservers as well. Search in MSDN for knowledge base articles relating to turning off oplocks in data-critical situations (ie. when you care about files not being corrupted :-). Jeremy. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] Samba - Oplocks = no
-Original Message- From: Jeremy Allison [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Yes they plague Windows fileservers as well. Search in MSDN for knowledge base articles relating to turning off oplocks in data-critical situations (ie. when you care about files not being corrupted :-). I ended up doing this on one of our NT 4.0 servers to keep Peachtree Accounting happy. The real bummer is that you can't veto oplocks for specific files or shares under NT like you can with Samba -- they're either all on, or all off. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Samba - Oplocks = no
In order to deal with bizarre MS Office junk, it looks like I may have to disable oplocks on my samba server. What kinds of problems, if any could arise from my having disabled the oplocks? Alex Laslavic Havertys Tech Services -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] Samba - Oplocks = no
In order to deal with bizarre MS Office junk, it looks like I may have to disable oplocks on my samba server. I feel your pain. You *CAN* just oplock veto all M$ Office files instead. What kinds of problems, if any could arise from my having disabled the oplocks? Just lower performance. Oplocks are OPportunistic LOCKS, which provide for client-side caching to be performed safely. No oplocks, no caching. What I always wonder though is whether or not these oplock problems plague Windows NT/2000 file servers as well, or if it's just an achilles heel within Samba. =MB= -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] Samba - Oplocks = no
On Thursday 13 May 2004 12:26 pm, David Brodbeck wrote: | -Original Message- | From: Jeremy Allison [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | | Yes they plague Windows fileservers as well. Search in MSDN for | knowledge base articles relating to turning off oplocks in | data-critical situations (ie. when you care about files not | being corrupted :-). | | I ended up doing this on one of our NT 4.0 servers to keep Peachtree | Accounting happy. The real bummer is that you can't veto oplocks for | specific files or shares under NT like you can with Samba -- they're | either all on, or all off. And if the Windows clients are running ACT! software don't forget there are some registry entries to deal with on the Windows clients as well. The actdiag.exe program from will do this for you. -- _ A Message From... L. Mark Stone Reliable Networks of Maine, LLC 477 Congress Street, 5th Floor Portland, ME 04101 Tel: (207) 772-5678 Web: http://www.RNoME.com -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Re: samba oplocks ...
What exactly are you trying to configure locking for? Are you running a network where the same files may be accessed at the same time? Samba should have at least regular and level2 oplocks on be default. I don't believe kernel oplocks are on be default but they aren't needed unless you're sharing a file that the linux system also writes to. Keep in mind that for multi-user database stuff you do not want oplocks in use with your database files. I use the veto oplock files option to deal with that. All this and more can be found by typing 'man smb.conf' at the command line. victor mejia vazquez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] I've tried to configure samba to lock files bewteen windows and linux but i couldn't i've read a lot of messages here, but trere is no one that have something about the file smb.conf. i have this in my global secction but i doesn't work [global] workgroup = GMC create mask = 0777 os level = 16 directory mask = 0777 hosts allow = 192.168.0., 127. share modes = no max log size = 1000 lock directory = /tmp/samba/lock level2 oplocks = yes strict locking = yes kernel oplocks = Yes blocking locks = Yes fake oplocks = No oplocks = Yes level2 oplocks = Yes can anybody give me suggestions, maybe someone has te same problem.. thank you - Estas vacaciones... no viajes sól@: http://www.muchagente.com Ya.com ADSL Router Wi-Fi: Sólo 29,90 ?/mes + IVA*. Router + Antivirus y firewall ¡Gratis! http://ir.ya.com/app/redir?o=2prefix=p_ya_com_tgt810afiliado=footer -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] samba oplocks ...
I've tried to configure samba to lock files bewteen windows and linux but i couldn't i've read a lot of messages here, but trere is no one that have something about the file smb.conf. i have this in my global secction but i doesn't work [global] workgroup = GMC create mask = 0777 os level = 16 directory mask = 0777 hosts allow = 192.168.0., 127. share modes = no max log size = 1000 lock directory = /tmp/samba/lock level2 oplocks = yes strict locking = yes kernel oplocks = Yes blocking locks = Yes fake oplocks = No oplocks = Yes level2 oplocks = Yes can anybody give me suggestions, maybe someone has te same problem.. thank you - Estas vacaciones... no viajes sól@: http://www.muchagente.com Ya.com ADSL Router Wi-Fi: Sólo 29,90 /mes + IVA*. Router + Antivirus y firewall ¡Gratis! http://ir.ya.com/app/redir?o=is2prefix=isp_ya_com_tgt810afiliado=fofooter -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] oplocks ?
I have follow ERROR Message in my log: [code] #cat samba.log.tn-ss1lxgxvomck [2004/03/21 13:34:32, 0] lib/util_sock.c:read_data(436) read_data: read failure for 45164. Error = Connection reset by peer [2004/03/21 13:39:03, 0] smbd/oplock.c:request_oplock_break(1011) request_oplock_break: no response received to oplock break request to pid 4146 on port 1031 for dev = 1601, inode = 134, file_id = 40 [2004/03/21 13:39:03, 0] smbd/open.c:open_mode_check(652) open_mode_check: exlusive oplock left by process 4146 after break ! For file BAK/103295_asdGJT.tar, dev = 1601, inode = 134. Deleting it to continue... [2004/03/21 13:39:03, 0] smbd/open.c:open_mode_check(656) open_mode_check: Existent process 4146 left active oplock. [2004/03/21 13:40:01, 0] lib/util_sock.c:read_data(436) read_data: read failure for 4. Error = Connection reset by peer [/code] and When i set oplocks = no and i make testparm: # testparm Load smb config files from /etc/samba/smb.conf Processing section [HDA-1] Processing section [HDA-2] Processing section [HDA-4] Processing section [HDB-1] Processing section [HDC-1] Loaded services file OK. Invalid combination of parameters for service HDA-1. Level II oplocks can only be set if oplocks are also set. Invalid combination of parameters for service HDA-2. Level II oplocks can only be set if oplocks are also set. Invalid combination of parameters for service HDA-4. Level II oplocks can only be set if oplocks are also set. Invalid combination of parameters for service HDB-1. Level II oplocks can only be set if oplocks are also set. Invalid combination of parameters for service HDC-1. Level II oplocks can only be set if oplocks are also set. I do not understand this... -- +++ NEU bei GMX und erstmalig in Deutschland: TÜV-geprüfter Virenschutz +++ 100% Virenerkennung nach Wildlist. Infos: http://www.gmx.net/virenschutz -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] oplocks ?
Hi everybody. Cold some one explain me why when I try to access to my samba shares with the netbios name, i received this error in the log? -- log.10.0.0.222 -- is the address of the client wich i use for access to the samba box [2004/03/21 15:19:58, 1] smbd/sesssetup.c:reply_spnego_kerberos(173) Failed to verify incoming ticket! [2004/03/21 15:19:58, 1] smbd/sesssetup.c:reply_spnego_kerberos(173) Failed to verify incoming ticket! -- This kind of error, wiht the same configuration, are not given if I access to the samba box directly to the ip address, if I specify in the configuration: security = SERVER, insteand security = ADS The error disappear, obviously i've done the join of the domain wiht net ads join -U cava (cava have the administrator rights)... I use debian with the kerberos (not heimdal one that dosen't work), winbind and samba 3.01 Any Idea? 10x *M* -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Oplocks -- Simultaneously writing to same file
On my small network, I allow users on 6 Windows machines to read and write the same Linux Share. Can anyone tell me whether the smb.conf file listed below will get me into trouble with users opening -- and possibly writing -- the SAME FILE simultaneously? I have read the documentation on oplocks and I'm not sure I understand it sufficiently. I need a simple plain English explanation of how to use it (and whether I need to use it). What are the different settings and what effect do they have? Most of my files are primarily being read (they are video files for a networked video editing system). However, there is a database file -- more or less, and index of all the videofiles that is frequently changing -- that all Windows clients must be able to read and overwrite. Until this week, I was using Windows 2000 Server to provide access to all my video files -- as well as the database file. Over the course of a year, I never had any problems or conflicts with two machines trying to write the same database file at the same time. I want to be sure I continue without problems now that I have switched to Linux as my server. Is the default behavior of Samba on Linux the same as Windows 2000 with regards to simultaneously opening and possibly writing one file? Your advice would be appreciated. # Global parameters [global] workgroup = RESWORLD server string = Avidserver encrypt passwords = yes printcap name = cups printing = cups security=user [raid_A] path = /home/avidserver/raid guest account = avidfiles guest ok = yes write ok = yes host allow = ALL force user = avidfiles force group = avidusers Andy Liebman -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Oplocks
I have read that I need to turn oplocks off for QuickBooks. I think I understand what Oplocks are. I also believe I understand why I need to turn them off. But in Windows, where is this option? Are Oplocks always on in windows? If this is the case, I reiterate why do I need to turn them off in Samba? **CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT** This e-mail (including attachments) is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this email is not the intended recipient, or agent responsible for delivering or copying of this communication, you are hereby notified that any retention, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please reply to the sender that you have received the message in error, then delete it. Thank you -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] Oplocks
On Wed, 4 Jun 2003, Brandon Lederer wrote: I have read that I need to turn oplocks off for QuickBooks. I think I understand what Oplocks are. I also believe I understand why I need to turn them off. But in Windows, where is this option? Are Oplocks always on in windows? If this is the case, I reiterate why do I need to turn them off in Samba? Suggest you read the chapter on locking in the following, it might help: http://samba.org/~jht/NT4migration/Samba-HOWTO-Collection.pdf - John T. -- John H Terpstra Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] Oplocks
On Wed, Jun 04, 2003 at 08:09:24AM -0500, Brandon Lederer wrote: I have read that I need to turn oplocks off for QuickBooks. I think I understand what Oplocks are. I also believe I understand why I need to turn them off. But in Windows, where is this option? Are Oplocks always on in windows? If this is the case, I reiterate why do I need to turn them off in Samba? oplocks are usually on in both Windows and Samba. In Samba you can turn them off per share or file or globally in the smb.conf. In Windows you can only turn them off globally in the registry. Jeremy. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] oplocks in 2.2.8a
Hi, Can I turn off oplocks for a particluer dir on a share or is it entire share only? Bri- __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] oplocks in 2.2.8a
ooops, its veto oplocks option sorry for the post Bri- __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] oplocks in 2.2.8a
On Tue, 3 Jun 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Can I turn off oplocks for a particluer dir on a share or is it entire share only? Oops. There's always veto oplock files, I've never used it, but it's there. - John T. -- John H Terpstra Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] oplocks and w2k
Hi, I resubmit my mail because my server become in production and the client must be correct. I have a PDC server with profiles share enabled. When a w2k client computer logout from domain, the client display a message the system cannot transfert the file xxx to //TOTO/profiles/yvan because this file is used by a other process. When I look on workstation.log I have oplock break. I apply a solution : I disabled the oplocks for the profiles share, but this change not resolve my problem. Description : Samba 2.2.7a with ldapsam and ACL support. The samba 2.2.8 version can resolve my problem ? Can anyone help me ? thank you -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] oplocks and w2k
Hi, I have a PDC server with profiles share enabled. When a w2k client computer disconnect from domain, this computer display a message the system cannot transfert the file xxx to //TOTO/profiles/yvan because this file is user by a other process. When I look on workstation.log I have oplock break. For the profiles share, I disabled the oplocks, but this change not resolve my problem. Description : Samba 2.2.7a with ldapsam and ACL support Can anyone help me ? thank you -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] oplocks
hello, how is it possible to unlock a file, which is locked by a oplock, without restart the samba server? ( sorry my english ) i use: samba 2.2.7 linux regards marcel beltz -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Oplocks...again...
I would like to know if like the [homes] section mapped to a single user at login time (H: drive) would have any of the problems discussed in previous emails. Specifically the oplock break issue. Since one and only one user can have this space mapped in our implementation (because of credential conflicts that windows does not allow), how could a user have a detrimental experience with oplocks? Since only that user can open the files whether .xls, .mdb or .doc (don't mean to pick on M$-Office) there should be no issue, right? I ask primarily because I've had oplocks off for some time now, but am always wondering about performance increases - I'll take them where I can get them. My other question is regarding a read-only share. We serve *lots* of software from what we call our M: drive. How will oplocks and/or level2 oplocks help there? I'm not sure I see how they will. I'm at the mercy of the randomness of served software, right? Any info on this will help. Thanks Samba Team - You've done a great job so far - it is greatly appreciated! Bill -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] Oplocks...again...
On Thu, 19 Dec 2002, William Jojo wrote: I would like to know if like the [homes] section mapped to a single user at login time (H: drive) would have any of the problems discussed in previous emails. Specifically the oplock break issue. Since one and only one user can have this space mapped in our implementation (because of credential conflicts that windows does not allow), how could a user have a detrimental experience with oplocks? It is the MS Windows client that decides whether or not to use file caching based on the server's ability to handle it. Only Samba allows this to be controlled on a per share basis. The performance difference is most noticible where the same file is repetitively accessed by the same application, but can be very significant also for MS Excel and MS Word files because of the way that they implement file access. Since only that user can open the files whether .xls, .mdb or .doc (don't mean to pick on M$-Office) there should be no issue, right? In single user access the issues are likely to be minor and I would enable oplocks. If the same user logs in multiple times and opens the same file on each machine then there is still a risk. I ask primarily because I've had oplocks off for some time now, but am always wondering about performance increases - I'll take them where I can get them. Try it! Let us know what differences you notice. My other question is regarding a read-only share. We serve *lots* of software from what we call our M: drive. How will oplocks and/or level2 oplocks help there? I'm not sure I see how they will. I'm at the mercy of the randomness of served software, right? If hte file has been cached in workstation memory it will open much faster on second and subsequent access. - John T. Any info on this will help. Thanks Samba Team - You've done a great job so far - it is greatly appreciated! Bill -- John H Terpstra Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] oplocks and samba 2.2.7
On Tue, 2002-12-17 at 23:49, Keith G. Murphy wrote: Simo Sorce wrote: Samba 2.2.3a has been realeased on february the 6th, they are 10 (ten) months !!! And 2.2.7a contains *lot* of bugfixes that will make also woody users a lot more happy. Simo. Well, there is this: http://www.perrier.eu.org/debian/index.html.en I just noticed it, linked to by this: http://www.apt-get.org/ Cannot vouch for these unofficial packages, of course. :-) Unfortunately there is no access there: http://www.perrier.eu.org/samba-debian/ Forbidden You don't have permission to access /samba-debian/ on this server. However I'm going to build team packages for debian. Simo. -- Simo Sorce- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Samba Team- http://www.samba.org Italian Site - http://samba.xsec.it -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] oplocks and samba 2.2.7
On Wed, 2002-12-18 at 17:02, Keith G. Murphy wrote: To get it, you need to put this line into your /etc/sources.list: deb http://www.perrier.eu.org/samba-debian stable main Of course you need, but if you do not have access to the directory it is really difficult apt-get will have either (and it does not have infact) !! Then run apt-get update. apt-get install samba --simulate will show you what the installation *would* do then. Been there, done that. Simo. -- Simo Sorce- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Samba Team- http://www.samba.org Italian Site - http://samba.xsec.it -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] oplocks and samba 2.2.7
Simo Sorce wrote: On Wed, 2002-12-18 at 17:02, Keith G. Murphy wrote: To get it, you need to put this line into your /etc/sources.list: deb http://www.perrier.eu.org/samba-debian stable main Of course you need, but if you do not have access to the directory it is really difficult apt-get will have either (and it does not have infact) !! Well, I do not have access to it through the browser, but apt-get works with that line just fine. I think you should try it again. Use the *exact* line I showed above. I just tested it and it works. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
