RE: [Samba] Can't kill smbd process
Hi, Sorry for not responding in a long time, I been really busy these days. To kill the process, I use kill -9 pid of the smbd process as root and it do nothing, no error message and the process still run. I found the possible source of this problem : each night we have a backup server (running opensuse 10.3) that connect to the file server (mount -t cifs ...) copy the files on his own hard drive, umount the share and then start transferring the files on tapes. When I check the swat status page in the morning and ps aux | greo smbd, I got like 20 process or more coming for the backup server file transfer and all those process can't be kill by sudo kill -9 pid. From this point some smbd process, that are created by normal user use, can't die either and keeps lock on files. One night, I shutdown the backup server and the next day every thing was working normally, no unkillable process. Thank you, Mathieu Beaudoin Responsable des T.I. CVT Corp Technologies de vitesse variable Variable Speed Technologies -Message d'origine- De : James A. Dinkel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Envoyé : 21 avril 2008 11:43 À : samba@lists.samba.org Objet : RE: [Samba] Can't kill smbd process TCP_NODELAY is still usefull and has a noticeable improvement in responsiveness. SO_RCVBUF=8192 and SO_SNDBUF=8192 are outdated and actually make things worse if running with a 2.6 kernel (they do help if running on a 2.4 kernel). But I too, am sure changing these will not fix your problem (but probably will improve network performance). How are you killing the open files? With kill -9? I kill locked, open files by finding the pid with lsof and then close it with sudo kill -9 pidnumber. I've never had kill -9 fail me and I imagine you would have to have serious kernel problems if kill -9 failed to kill a pid.3 James -Original Message From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ryan Novosielski Sent: Friday, April 18, 2008 3:55 PM To: samba@lists.samba.org Subject: Re: [Samba] Can't kill smbd process I've seen written here many times that the TCP options are old/no longer needed. Not that I expect that removing them will fix anything. Seems to me you have an awful lot things defined specifically there. I don't know how those relate to the defaults. Or is that testparm -v output? - -- _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ |Y#| | | |\/| | \ |\ | | |Ryan Novosielski - Systems Programmer II |$| |__| | | |__/ | \| _| |[EMAIL PROTECTED] - 973/972.0922 (2-0922) \__/ Univ. of Med. and Dent.|IST/AST - NJMS Medical Science Bldg - C630 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFICQqrmb+gadEcsb4RAmjxAKCQudeurwtv7YWf20mPvr/5pTVUqACfbF+z bTXN5/lgADDY5qywZKJEzp0= =IXls -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] Can't kill smbd process
Mathieu Beaudoin wrote: Hi, Sorry for not responding in a long time, I been really busy these days. To kill the process, I use kill -9 pid of the smbd process as root and it do nothing, no error message and the process still run. I found the possible source of this problem : each night we have a backup server (running opensuse 10.3) that connect to the file server (mount -t cifs ...) copy the files on his own hard drive, umount the share and then start transferring the files on tapes. When I check the swat status page in rsync would be a much, much better choice for that purpose. -- Toby Bluhm Alltech Medical Systems America, Inc. 30825 Aurora Road Suite 100 Solon Ohio 44139 440-424-2240 -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] Can't kill smbd process
TCP_NODELAY is still usefull and has a noticeable improvement in responsiveness. SO_RCVBUF=8192 and SO_SNDBUF=8192 are outdated and actually make things worse if running with a 2.6 kernel (they do help if running on a 2.4 kernel). But I too, am sure changing these will not fix your problem (but probably will improve network performance). How are you killing the open files? With kill -9? I kill locked, open files by finding the pid with lsof and then close it with sudo kill -9 pidnumber. I've never had kill -9 fail me and I imagine you would have to have serious kernel problems if kill -9 failed to kill a pid.3 James -Original Message From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ryan Novosielski Sent: Friday, April 18, 2008 3:55 PM To: samba@lists.samba.org Subject: Re: [Samba] Can't kill smbd process I've seen written here many times that the TCP options are old/no longer needed. Not that I expect that removing them will fix anything. Seems to me you have an awful lot things defined specifically there. I don't know how those relate to the defaults. Or is that testparm -v output? - -- _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ |Y#| | | |\/| | \ |\ | | |Ryan Novosielski - Systems Programmer II |$| |__| | | |__/ | \| _| |[EMAIL PROTECTED] - 973/972.0922 (2-0922) \__/ Univ. of Med. and Dent.|IST/AST - NJMS Medical Science Bldg - C630 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFICQqrmb+gadEcsb4RAmjxAKCQudeurwtv7YWf20mPvr/5pTVUqACfbF+z bTXN5/lgADDY5qywZKJEzp0= =IXls -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] Can't kill smbd process
On 4/21/2008, James A. Dinkel ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: TCP_NODELAY is still usefull and has a noticeable improvement in responsiveness. this is contrary to what the Samba devs have repeatedly said in the past. I hope someone will chime in here and set the record straight... -- Best regards, Charles -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] Can't kill smbd process
I meant to specify: it has a noticeable improvement ON MY SYSTEM. This is from a personal, subjective view and I don't know that I've verified this from any other documentation. I just want to point this out because it COULD have been all in my head. I don't think overall transfer speed changed, but directory listings and opening up small files seemed to be faster. James P.S. Sorry for the formatting, but I'm posting this from Outlook which is not very mailing-list-friendly. -Original Message- From: Charles Marcus [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 11:22 AM To: James A. Dinkel Cc: samba@lists.samba.org Subject: Re: [Samba] Can't kill smbd process On 4/21/2008, James A. Dinkel ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: TCP_NODELAY is still usefull and has a noticeable improvement in responsiveness. this is contrary to what the Samba devs have repeatedly said in the past. I hope someone will chime in here and set the record straight... -- Best regards, Charles -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] Can't kill smbd process
On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 12:21:59PM -0400, Charles Marcus wrote: On 4/21/2008, James A. Dinkel ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: TCP_NODELAY is still usefull and has a noticeable improvement in responsiveness. this is contrary to what the Samba devs have repeatedly said in the past. I hope someone will chime in here and set the record straight... That's easy -- TCP_NODELAY is default :-) Volker pgpVGb2noIuNt.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
Re: [Samba] Can't kill smbd process
On 4/21/2008 3:51 PM, Volker Lendecke wrote: On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 12:21:59PM -0400, Charles Marcus wrote: On 4/21/2008, James A. Dinkel ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: TCP_NODELAY is still usefull and has a noticeable improvement in responsiveness. this is contrary to what the Samba devs have repeatedly said in the past. I hope someone will chime in here and set the record straight... That's easy -- TCP_NODELAY is default :-) Well that explains it... :) thanks... -- Best regards, Charles -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] Can't kill smbd process
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Mathieu Beaudoin wrote: Hi, Since this week my Samba keep accumulating smbd process that keep lock on files and neither me as root or samba itself can't kill. The only way to release the locked files is to reboot the machine and this is really annoying for all the clients. I read in a forum that this might be link with a kernel corruption, but this threads hasn't been active in a long time and wasn't so clear about the corruption. So I turn on your experiences and knowledge to help me find a solution to this problem. I run Samba 3.0.26a-3.5 on Opensuse 10.3 with the 2.6.22.17-0.1-default. I don't thing the problem come from my smb.conf, the deadtime is set to 10 minutes but since those process keep a lock on files they are not kill after 10 minutes of inactivity. [global] workgroup = Bidon server string = PDC - File Server log file = /log/samba.log server signing = auto deadtime = 10 socket options = TCP_NODELAY SO_RCVBUF=8192 SO_SNDBUF=8192 printcap name = cups add machine script = /usr/sbin/useradd -c Machine -d /var/lib/nobody -s /bin/false %m$ logon path = \\%L\profiles\.msprofile logon drive = P: logon home = \\%L\%U\.9xprofile domain logons = Yes preferred master = Yes domain master = Yes wins proxy = Yes wins server = eth0:10.0.0.11 wins support = Yes ldap ssl = no acl group control = Yes profile acls = Yes map acl inherit = Yes printing = cups cups options = raw print command = lpq command = %p lprm command = store dos attributes = Yes strict locking = Yes include = /etc/samba/dhcp.conf [data] comment = data path = /data/data read only = No inherit permissions = Yes inherit acls = Yes inherit owner = Yes use sendfile = Yes dos filemode = Yes dos filetime resolution = Yes [email] path = /data/email/ read only = No browseable = No blocking locks = No locking = No oplocks = No level2 oplocks = No posix locking = No strict locking = No dos filemode = Yes dos filetime resolution = Yes I've seen written here many times that the TCP options are old/no longer needed. Not that I expect that removing them will fix anything. Seems to me you have an awful lot things defined specifically there. I don't know how those relate to the defaults. Or is that testparm -v output? - -- _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ |Y#| | | |\/| | \ |\ | | |Ryan Novosielski - Systems Programmer II |$| |__| | | |__/ | \| _| |[EMAIL PROTECTED] - 973/972.0922 (2-0922) \__/ Univ. of Med. and Dent.|IST/AST - NJMS Medical Science Bldg - C630 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFICQqrmb+gadEcsb4RAmjxAKCQudeurwtv7YWf20mPvr/5pTVUqACfbF+z bTXN5/lgADDY5qywZKJEzp0= =IXls -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
