Re: Solaris fcntl bug 4700402
On Fri, 11 Oct 2002, Jeff Mandel wrote: > Are your patches by special arrangement with Sun? I have a contract > but see no available t-patches and no reference to one in the bug > listing for 4700402. Where can I obtain this patch? T-patches are "pre-release" patches; "T" is for "testing", I think. A customer files bug report, Sun analyse the problem and then come up with a patch for the customer to try out, to see if it fixes the problem. If the fix appears to work then the T-patch goes through all the proper review and release engineering processes to become a publically available patch (perhaps, eventually). T-patches don't tend to get wide distribution (except for some of those which close serious security holes). I haven't tried this yet but I would guess that those of us who are support customers, and who are experiencing difficulties, may be able to get the T-patch if we open a support request with Sun service quoting the bug-id. Regards, -- Neil Hoggarth Departmental Computer Officer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Laboratory of Physiology http://www.physiol.ox.ac.uk/~njh/ University of Oxford, UK
Re: Solaris fcntl bug 4700402
Are your patches by special arrangement with Sun? I have a contract but see no available t-patches and no reference to one in the bug listing for 4700402. Where can I obtain this patch? Thanks, Jeff >I've also just recieved this t-patch, and I'll be testing this weekend. I'll >post results asap. > >According to my contact at sun, they are looking at a Jan/03 date for the >official release. > >Cheers, > T.
Re: Solaris fcntl bug 4700402
Tristan Ball wrote: > I've also just recieved this t-patch, and I'll be testing this weekend. > I'll post results asap. We've received the patch quite some time ago - and so far I can say that it seems a good and *freakin' fast* one. ah - there they are. > > According to my contact at sun, they are looking at a Jan/03 date for > the official release. [...this is a snippage from an internal mail...] I have finished the fcntl-tests on Unlucky. As you might have heard me before - they are quite impressive. The locker program goes amazingly faster and even if the machine is loaded, it is still quite responsive. As a matter of fact - terminals no longer seem locked when under load. The samba torture test also shows radical improvement. I could go as high as 250 simultaneous processes before, because of some limitations occuring also on BSD (Chris Smith confirmed this) hit and the tests were aborted. Here are some results - to judge for yourself: Locker -- 800 processes - 50 locks BEFORE AFTER 12mins 55sec00mins 07sec 900 processes - 50 locks 16mins 57sec00mins 10sec 1000 processes - 50 locks 26mins 25sec00mins 13sec 1100 processes - 50 locks 36mins 50sec00mins 15sec 1200 processes - 50 locks 59mins 40sec00mins 21sec At this point I no loger have data for the "BEFORE" case, so all I can say is that I went as high as 4100 processes with 50 locks and I got 6mins and 50 seconds to completion. The most interesting thing to note is that by far the most time-comsuming task is forking the processes, and that once they're created, draining the locks in the queue only takes a few seconds, where as before it would've taken a comparable amount of time to the creation time. Samba Torture - BEFORE AFTER 100 clients1673.03 secs 750.573 secs 78.8988 MBit/sec 175.866 MBit/sec 150 clients3159.51 secs 1213.71 secs 62.668 MBit/sec163.136 MBit/sec 200 clientsNO DATA1905.17 secs 138.571 MBit/sec 250 clientsNO DATA2686.8 secs 122.823 MBit/sec [...end of snippage...] I hope you find these results interesting. Unfortunately I cannot say anything about how this patch behaves in productions since it was decided that it shall not be inflicted upon our users just yet. Questions? Anyone? Drool? :) Ino!~ -- I have seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. Time to die.
Re: Solaris fcntl bug 4700402
I've also just recieved this t-patch, and I'll be testing this weekend. I'll post results asap. According to my contact at sun, they are looking at a Jan/03 date for the official release. Cheers, T. Romeril, Alan wrote: > I have just been testing a binary T-patch fix for Solaris 8 on a machine > here looks like the fix they`ve got is a good `un. Tridge`s locker > program runs much better on the box I tested this patch on. For much > better read a hell of a lot better in some cases. I`ve mailed off > asking for any news on when it`ll hit the recommended set. > > Cheers, > Alan > > David Collier-Brown wrote: > >> Neil Hoggarth wrote: >> >>> Does anyone know if there have been any further developments on the >>> Solaris fcntl() issue? >>> >> >> I haven't heard anything: customers tend to hear before >> I do, though. >> >> --dave >> > >
Re: Solaris fcntl bug 4700402
I have just been testing a binary T-patch fix for Solaris 8 on a machine here looks like the fix they`ve got is a good `un. Tridge`s locker program runs much better on the box I tested this patch on. For much better read a hell of a lot better in some cases. I`ve mailed off asking for any news on when it`ll hit the recommended set. Cheers, Alan David Collier-Brown wrote: >Neil Hoggarth wrote: > >>Does anyone know if there have been any further developments on the >>Solaris fcntl() issue? >> > > I haven't heard anything: customers tend to hear before >I do, though. > >--dave >
Re: Solaris fcntl bug 4700402
Neil Hoggarth wrote: > Does anyone know if there have been any further developments on the > Solaris fcntl() issue? I haven't heard anything: customers tend to hear before I do, though. --dave -- David Collier-Brown, | Always do right. This will gratify DMCO's MTEC team in Toronto| some people and astonish the rest. Formerly Opcom, ACE and SIS. | (905) 415-2849 or x52849 | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Solaris fcntl bug 4700402
On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, Broughton, Jim wrote: > This is Sun UK's answer after I requested the fix for Bug ID:4700402 > ... > Just to confirm, the fix will be put in to the latest version of > solaris first (solaris 10) then back ported to earlier revisions. > Although this has not happened yet, it is due to happen very soon. > > There is no patch available at the moment, but once the fix has been > put in to Solaris 10, then back ported, a test binary will be > produced." Does anyone know if there have been any further developments on the Solaris fcntl() issue? Regards, -- Neil Hoggarth Departmental Computer Officer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Laboratory of Physiology http://www.physiol.ox.ac.uk/~njh/ University of Oxford, UK
Re: Solaris fcntl bug 4700402 at the University of Queensland
On Wed, Sep 11, 2002 at 12:25:10PM -0400, David Collier-Brown wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Oh thank goodness for that, I was worried when I saw the > > other message about the fix being --with-spinlocks as > > that's not a good solution. > > > > We can't hold back 2.2.6 for this unfortunately, we'll > > have to put something in the release notes about it - > > any chance of getting the patchid pre-allocated so we > > know what it will be ? > > I don't know if that's doable, but I'll try: > with your permission I'll quote your last paragraph > in the request. No problem, although the Web site solution also proposed might be better in the long run. Jeremy.
Re: Solaris fcntl bug 4700402 at the University of Queensland
On Wed, Sep 11, 2002 at 08:09:36AM -0400, Sean O'Malley wrote: > Can someone post to the list or send me a direct email when the patch is > available? I think this will solve part of the problems we are having. > We are under some pressure to get a fix out for this problem since when > the Solaris box crashes it takes out a lab or two with it, and sometimes > during testing. I'm sure DaveCB and the Team will do this - keep monitoring for details. Jeremy.
Re: Solaris fcntl bug 4700402 at the University of Queensland
On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, David Collier-Brown wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Oh thank goodness for that, I was worried when I saw the > > other message about the fix being --with-spinlocks as > > that's not a good solution. > > > > We can't hold back 2.2.6 for this unfortunately, we'll > > have to put something in the release notes about it - > > any chance of getting the patchid pre-allocated so we > > know what it will be ? > > I don't know if that's doable, but I'll try: > with your permission I'll quote your last paragraph > in the request. Knowing patch numbers now might actually be counter-productive. Let me explain. Rather than: " Known Sun patches at time or writing will be (or are): 888000-01 for Solaris 8 888001-01 for Solaris 8_x86 999000-01 for Solaris 9 999001-01 for Solaris 9_x86 something like: " You are encouraged to monitor http://www.samba.org/ for developments. The former looks un-future-proof. By contrast the latter could be set up at 2.2.6 code-freeze (now?), and would remain accurate for the lifetime of whatever versions of Solaris are affected and addressed. Remember, too, that Sun sometimes make one patch obsolete and roll its functionality into another. Or, conversely, break out part of a patch into a separate patch. Things like this would invalidate the "frozen" Samba release notes. My suggestion would simply need a suitable Sun-related volunteer (are we thinking Dave C-B here?!) to provide occasional updates behind that URL. -- : David LeeI.T. Service : : Systems Programmer Computer Centre : : University of Durham : : http://www.dur.ac.uk/t.d.lee/South Road: : Durham: : Phone: +44 191 374 2882 U.K. :
Re: Solaris fcntl bug 4700402 at the University of Queensland
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Oh thank goodness for that, I was worried when I saw the > other message about the fix being --with-spinlocks as > that's not a good solution. > > We can't hold back 2.2.6 for this unfortunately, we'll > have to put something in the release notes about it - > any chance of getting the patchid pre-allocated so we > know what it will be ? I don't know if that's doable, but I'll try: with your permission I'll quote your last paragraph in the request. --dave -- David Collier-Brown, | Always do right. This will gratify Performance & Engineering | some people and astonish the rest. Americas Customer Engineering, | -- Mark Twain (905) 415-2849 | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Solaris fcntl bug 4700402 at the University of Queensland
On Wed, Sep 11, 2002 at 07:46:07AM -0400, David Collier-Brown wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Are you sure this is the same bug ? The history of the bug > > I'm referring to was reported by Volker on one of his German > > Samba accounts (contact him directly for the name of the > > customer) and escalated into the Solaris kernel team by > > tridge via a personal contact > > Yes it was: the two bug reports were proceeding > in parallel until the kernel team noticed, and > combined them into one. > > Incidentally, thats why I didn't know until recently > that this bug also affected TDBs. > > I'm waiting for a patch number to come > out so we can pick it up from sunsolve. Oh thank goodness for that, I was worried when I saw the other message about the fix being --with-spinlocks as that's not a good solution. We can't hold back 2.2.6 for this unfortunately, we'll have to put something in the release notes about it - any chance of getting the patchid pre-allocated so we know what it will be ? Jeremy.
Re: Solaris fcntl bug 4700402 at the University of Queensland
Andy Thomas wwrote: > I just checked the SunSolve site. For bug report 4700402, they say it > is closed, and say the work around is to compile with --with-spinlocks. That's odd, I can't find it at sunsolve.Sun.COM... In any case should also have noted that a solution is being prepared... The spinlock workaround is just that, a temporary workaround. --dave -- David Collier-Brown, | Always do right. This will gratify Performance & Engineering | some people and astonish the rest. Americas Customer Engineering, | -- Mark Twain (905) 415-2849 | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Solaris fcntl bug 4700402 at the University of Queensland
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 > Are you sure this is the same bug ? The history of the bug > I'm referring to was reported by Volker on one of his German > Samba accounts (contact him directly for the name of the > customer) and escalated into the Solaris kernel team by > tridge via a personal contact (phone call I think) when > he and Volker were here in the Bay Area for the CIFS > conference. The patch was first created by this engineer. The bug-ID was 4735093, although I don't have any positive report on somebody applying this patch and solving the problem. Would be *very* interesting for somebody get that patch and give a report. Volker -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Key-ID ADE377D8, Fingerprint available: phone +49 551 370 iD8DBQE9fzlSZeeQha3jd9gRArQhAJ9TSCz7ghNzRHGWYWi79rXZOgc7vQCeJ8/Z En6Oet+u79eRxGYpHmJQ4/o= =dTqq -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Solaris fcntl bug 4700402 at the University of Queensland
Can someone post to the list or send me a direct email when the patch is available? I think this will solve part of the problems we are having. We are under some pressure to get a fix out for this problem since when the Solaris box crashes it takes out a lab or two with it, and sometimes during testing. TIA Sean -- Sean O'Malley, Information Technologist Michigan State University - On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, David Collier-Brown wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Are you sure this is the same bug ? The history of the bug > > I'm referring to was reported by Volker on one of his German > > Samba accounts (contact him directly for the name of the > > customer) and escalated into the Solaris kernel team by > > tridge via a personal contact > > Yes it was: the two bug reports were proceeding > in parallel until the kernel team noticed, and > combined them into one. > > Incidentally, thats why I didn't know until recently > that this bug also affected TDBs. > > I'm waiting for a patch number to come > out so we can pick it up from sunsolve. > > > --dave >
Re: Solaris fcntl bug 4700402 at the University of Queensland
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Are you sure this is the same bug ? The history of the bug > I'm referring to was reported by Volker on one of his German > Samba accounts (contact him directly for the name of the > customer) and escalated into the Solaris kernel team by > tridge via a personal contact Yes it was: the two bug reports were proceeding in parallel until the kernel team noticed, and combined them into one. Incidentally, thats why I didn't know until recently that this bug also affected TDBs. I'm waiting for a patch number to come out so we can pick it up from sunsolve. --dave -- David Collier-Brown, | Always do right. This will gratify Performance & Engineering | some people and astonish the rest. Americas Customer Engineering, | -- Mark Twain (905) 415-2849 | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Re: Solaris fcntl bug 4700402 at the University of Queensland
This is Sun UK's answer after I requested the fix for Bug ID:4700402 "I have had a response from the escalation engineer, he is not in the US! Just to confirm, the fix will be put in to the latest version of solaris first (solaris 10) then back ported to earlier revisions. Although this has not happened yet, it is due to happen very soon. There is no patch available at the moment, but once the fix has been put in to Solaris 10, then back ported, a test binary will be produced." Looks like I'll be downgrading to 2.0.x this weekend... :-( Cheers, Jim > -Original Message- > From: Andy Thomas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 10 September 2002 22:10 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Re: Solaris fcntl bug 4700402 at the University of > Queensland > > > > > We were hit HARD with the fcntl lock problem. It was taking users > 10 minutes to log in to a PC (loading profile). We were using 2.2.4 > and 2.2.5, Solaris 8. We dropped back to samba 2.0.6 to "fix" the > problem - it now takes seconds to load the profile. > > I just checked the SunSolve site. For bug report 4700402, > they say it > is closed, and say the work around is to compile with > --with-spinlocks. > > Andy Thomas > > > >Message: 5 > >Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2002 15:10:24 + > >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > >[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Subject: Re: Solaris fcntl bug 4700402 at the University of > Queensland > > > >On Tue, Sep 10, 2002 at 08:27:09AM -0400, David Collier-Brown wrote: > >> The first responses to the fcntl problem we've been working > > on will be to the University of Queensland, who reported > >> the bug and escalated it. > >> I don't happen to know the expected schedule: I do know > >> we're doing quality control and scheduling it for inclusion > >> in Solaris (but you could have guessed that). > >> > >>Sites with service contracts should ask for the fix for > >> 4700402. I'm on the email list for it and will keep an > >> ear open here in ACE. > >> > >> UQ, have you heard anything I havent? > > > >Are you sure this is the same bug ? The history of the bug > >I'm referring to was reported by Volker on one of his German > >Samba accounts (contact him directly for the name of the > >customer) and escalated into the Solaris kernel team by > >tridge via a personal contact (phone call I think) when > >he and Volker were here in the Bay Area for the CIFS > >conference. The patch was first created by this engineer. > > > >I'm CC:ing Volker and tridge on this email so they can > >comment. > > > >Volker, Jerry, if you know the solaris bugid/patch id for this > >bug we need to put it in the release notes for Samba 2.2.6. > > > >Jeremy. > > > This e-mail (including any attachments) is intended solely for the intended recipient. It may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, any reliance on, use, disclosure, dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail or attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by telephone +44 20 7782 6000 and delete the e-mail and all attachments immediately. If you wish to know whether the statements and opinions contained in this email are endorsed by News International or its associated companies (NI Group), or wish to rely on them, please request written confirmation from Corporate Affairs. In the absence of such confirmation NI Group accepts no responsibility or liability. NI Group reserves the right to monitor emails in accordance with the Telecommunications (Lawful Business Practice) (Interception of Communications) Regulations 2000. [NI Group does not accept liability for any virus introduced by this e-mail or any attachment and you are advised to use up-to-date virus checking software.] News International plc is the holding company for the News International group of companies and is registered in England No 81701, with its address at 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY
Re: Re: Solaris fcntl bug 4700402 at the University of Queensland
On Tue, Sep 10, 2002 at 04:09:30PM -0500, Andy Thomas wrote: > > > We were hit HARD with the fcntl lock problem. It was taking users > 10 minutes to log in to a PC (loading profile). We were using 2.2.4 > and 2.2.5, Solaris 8. We dropped back to samba 2.0.6 to "fix" the > problem - it now takes seconds to load the profile. > > I just checked the SunSolve site. For bug report 4700402, they say it > is closed, and say the work around is to compile with --with-spinlocks. No that's rubbish. Using --with-spinlocks is not a solution. This is a Solaris scaling bug with the Solaris implementation of fcntl locks and there is a provisional fix for it. Volker, can you give more details on the fix ? Thanks, Jeremy.
Re: Re: Solaris fcntl bug 4700402 at the University of Queensland
We were hit HARD with the fcntl lock problem. It was taking users 10 minutes to log in to a PC (loading profile). We were using 2.2.4 and 2.2.5, Solaris 8. We dropped back to samba 2.0.6 to "fix" the problem - it now takes seconds to load the profile. I just checked the SunSolve site. For bug report 4700402, they say it is closed, and say the work around is to compile with --with-spinlocks. Andy Thomas >Message: 5 >Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2002 15:10:24 + >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: Solaris fcntl bug 4700402 at the University of Queensland > >On Tue, Sep 10, 2002 at 08:27:09AM -0400, David Collier-Brown wrote: >> The first responses to the fcntl problem we've been working > on will be to the University of Queensland, who reported >> the bug and escalated it. >> I don't happen to know the expected schedule: I do know >> we're doing quality control and scheduling it for inclusion >> in Solaris (but you could have guessed that). >> >>Sites with service contracts should ask for the fix for >> 4700402. I'm on the email list for it and will keep an >> ear open here in ACE. >> >> UQ, have you heard anything I havent? > >Are you sure this is the same bug ? The history of the bug >I'm referring to was reported by Volker on one of his German >Samba accounts (contact him directly for the name of the >customer) and escalated into the Solaris kernel team by >tridge via a personal contact (phone call I think) when >he and Volker were here in the Bay Area for the CIFS >conference. The patch was first created by this engineer. > >I'm CC:ing Volker and tridge on this email so they can >comment. > >Volker, Jerry, if you know the solaris bugid/patch id for this >bug we need to put it in the release notes for Samba 2.2.6. > >Jeremy.
Re: Solaris fcntl bug 4700402 at the University of Queensland
On Tue, Sep 10, 2002 at 08:27:09AM -0400, David Collier-Brown wrote: > The first responses to the fcntl problem we've been working > on will be to the University of Queensland, who reported > the bug and escalated it. > I don't happen to know the expected schedule: I do know > we're doing quality control and scheduling it for inclusion > in Solaris (but you could have guessed that). > >Sites with service contracts should ask for the fix for > 4700402. I'm on the email list for it and will keep an > ear open here in ACE. > > UQ, have you heard anything I havent? Are you sure this is the same bug ? The history of the bug I'm referring to was reported by Volker on one of his German Samba accounts (contact him directly for the name of the customer) and escalated into the Solaris kernel team by tridge via a personal contact (phone call I think) when he and Volker were here in the Bay Area for the CIFS conference. The patch was first created by this engineer. I'm CC:ing Volker and tridge on this email so they can comment. Volker, Jerry, if you know the solaris bugid/patch id for this bug we need to put it in the release notes for Samba 2.2.6. Jeremy.
