Hi,
Freezing up means a kernel bug not a Samba problem. Can you ping the
servers when they have frozen up ?
Yes, but no ssh or KVM.
Something is going on here. What more can we do to investigate it?
You need to get real data. Get servers that experience
the problem regularly to send log
On 11/24/2010 03:47 PM, Volker Lendecke wrote:
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 03:03:33PM -0500, Andy Liebman wrote:
You suggested previously this might be a kernel bug, or that the
failed attempts might be using up some scarce resource (memory? open
files? what did you have in mind?) Assuming we can
On 11/09/2010 04:43 AM, Volker Lendecke wrote:
On Mon, Nov 08, 2010 at 09:23:06AM -0500, Andy Liebman wrote:
And now I have this case.
I would appreciate the opinion of the Samba.org folks. Does it make
sense that constant bombardment of a Samba server with failed
connection attempts could
On 11/09/2010 04:43 AM, Volker Lendecke wrote:
On Mon, Nov 08, 2010 at 09:23:06AM -0500, Andy Liebman wrote:
And now I have this case.
I would appreciate the opinion of the Samba.org folks. Does it make
sense that constant bombardment of a Samba server with failed
connection attempts could
way to traverse symlinks on share?
I sounds like maybe you need to your [General] section the following line:
unix extensions = no
That will make Samba resolve the symlinks on the server side.
Andy Liebman
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions
On 11/08/2010 06:40 AM, Konstantin Boyandin wrote:
I sounds like maybe you need to your [General] section the following
line:
unix extensions = no
That will make Samba resolve the symlinks on the server side.
In my case the section was named [global].
Thank you very much, that did
Hi,
I am responsible for 1000+ Samba servers. One particular server keeps
crashing every few days. The server freezes up hard. I have swapped 100
percent of the hardware (in other words, I replaced Server A with a
completely new Server B) but the crashing is still occurring.
The server is
testparm, indeed I see the values from the include file and
NOT from smb.conf. I just want to make sure there isn't some hidden
trap in what I am doing. Good advice welcome.
Andy Liebman
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: https
besides us must have thought
keeping write cache size was still a good idea??
Andy Liebman
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Hi
Well it's because this code must have a bug :-). Volker is
right, you should check it first with the v3-6-test git tree
code, as he has done some changes there that might have
already fixed it (if so we will back-port to 3.5.next of
course). If not, we'll need voluminous traces to track
down
)
* run the following command, all on one line:
$ defaults write com.apple.desktopservices DSDontWriteNetworkStores
true
You may have to run it as sudo, i.e.,
$ sudo defaults write com.apple.desktopservices
DSDontWriteNetworkStores true
-- Andy Liebman
--
To unsubscribe from
According to Jeremy, using write cache size = 262144, you end up with a 256
_megabyte_ cache for _each_ smbd process. Apparently the setting value is in
kilobytes, not bytes. With 10 active users that equals ~2.5GB of system
(virtual) memory allocated to smbd read/write cache. This would
workstations via 10
Gigabit, there is no problem whatsoever in reading/writing 300 MB/sec
from any given client.
Any good insights into the cause of what I'm seeing would be much
appreciated. Thanks in advance.
Andy Liebman
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read
With this setting of write cache, if the apps have a good locality
of data reference you'll almost never hit the disk, as everything
will be served out of that memory cache.
Sorry I can't be too helpful here, but this really doesn't look like
a Samba problem.
Jeremy.
Thanks Jeremy,
Since sending my first email, I have another 2 hours of flawless
performance. This contrasts with days on end of these periodic
dropouts before we set the write cache line.
It's a kernel issue - by setting write cache you are changing the
smbd read/write patterns to the disk. How much
Thanks, Jeremy!
Andy
Currently aio on Linux is horribly broken due to a conservative
glibc, which limits asynchronous requests to one outstanding one
per file descriptor (which pretty much makes all io synchronous
on Linux, whether you set aio sizes or not :-( ). I think this
is a bug which
Hello,
Is there any straightforward way to see whether Samba is using
asynchronous i/o? In other words, if you specify in smb.conf to use
aio for all transfers larger than 1 KB (pretty much everything), how can
you tell that aio is actually being used? Are there any counters in
Linux or
Kimball Larsen wrote:
I'm running samba on a local linux server, with a bunch of shares. Over the last several years, this has worked perfectly in our heterogenous network of OS X and Windows. All my windows clients still work perfectly - my users can mount the samba shares and create, rename,
Hello
Any ideas? I am going to compile the latest and greatest Samba and
put it on a test machine to see if it resolves the problem.
Thanks --
Kathy
I don't have a solution to your problem, although I discovered a similar
problem in Samba's behavior with symlinks to FILES. Getting good
had open, when both users finally closed the
file the FILE would get deleted rather than the SYMLINK.
Could it be related?
Andy Liebman
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Hi Volker,
The problem is the following: When creating a file we have
to prove that the file does not exist in a different
upper/lower case combination. Under Unix, the only way to
prove this is to list the whole directory and do a case
insensitive comparison on each existing file.
Thank
Hello,
I am experiencing a strange problem when writing (capturing) DPX video
files to a Linux/Samba share. Basically, I'm seeing seeing a single smbd
process go from 9 percent CPU utilization to 100 percent CPU utilization
over the course of about 40 minutes. When smbd reaches 100 percent,
Samba will use all the cores you can give it - so long as
you have at least more clients than cores.
Jeremy.
While I have found that to be true in my environment, I have also found
that MOST smbd's end up on Core 0 MOST of the time. This is true even
if I am hammering a 10 Gigabit
Address to the SAMBA Server? Can I connect some shares
to one IP address and other shares to the other IP Address? Will that
result in more than one cifsd?
Andy Liebman
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo
Can anyone recommend a good how to for mapping Windows ACLs onto a
Samba Share? I have a very specific Windows permission setting that I'm
trying to create and I can't quite figure out how to do it.
In specific, I'm using an application that doesn't respond optimally to
read only files unless
eric wrote:
Hi,
Do you use acl FS ?
Derrick.
Yes. ext3 mounted with acl support.
Andy Liebman a écrit :
Can anyone recommend a good how to for mapping Windows ACLs onto a
Samba Share? I have a very specific Windows permission setting that
I'm trying to create and I can't quite figure out
Jeremy Allison wrote:
On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 10:47:08AM -0400, Andy Liebman wrote:
Does this problem sound familiar to anybody. On a busy Linux server
that exports lots of Samba Shares for video editing, upgrading from
Samba 3.0.23d to Samba 3.0.28a has caused a huge problem.
After
fine.
Restarting Samba, and reconnecting to the shares brings the files back.
The problem I am describing has been very reproducible. It's just a
matter of waiting a few hours and occurs. Reverting back to Samba
3.0.23d makes the problem go away.
Any ideas?
Andy Liebman
--
To unsubscribe
I have a strange problem and I'm hoping that somebody on the list
recognizes what it is.
I am running Samba 3.0.23d on a Linux box with 2.6.20.15 kernel.
I am connecting from 5 or 6 Windows XP SP 2 boxes.
A share on the Linux box exists called Music (Note the UPPER CASE
M). The share is
In the past week, working with Samba 3.0.23d and the Linux 2.6.20
kernel, I have observed something interesting about Samba and the
utilization of multiple CPU cores.
On a single Dual Core 3 Ghz Xeon machine, when I am hammering the Samba
server with requests from many client machines, a
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello Andy,
I noticed your post on the samba list.
Did you ever resolve it ?
I have the same issue with 3.0.22 and XFS group quotas not working, did you
ever find a resolution ?
-Michael Carmody
I did not resolve it. I am still using 3.0.13 precisely because of
). That is not an option at the
moment.
Thanks in advance for the help.
Andy Liebman
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
on the shares so that OS
X sees the shares as under 2 TB. Pre-Tiger OS X versions can't deal with
shares seen as being over 2 TB -- they simply can't write to them. Say
no space available.
Andy Liebman
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: https
is going on,
I would be happy to collect the information.
But, it has to be in the next couple of hours. It is 8:30 am Friday in
Boston, MA USA. I have to reboot the machine to use it in about 3 hours.
Note that rpc.statd also seems to be out of control. Don't know if it is
related.
Andy
anybody.
Andy Liebman
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
and trouble-free
of all of the Samba versions I have used with OS X.
Hope that helps.
Andy Liebman
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
VOLUME (in this case, 4.4 TB).
What can I do to help you track down the source of this problem? Is
there a workaround? It doesn't seem as though this is the same problem
that was reported earlier about LVM and XFS and Quotas.
Regards,
Andy Liebman
--
To unsubscribe from this list go
of a Samba share. With 3.0.13 and below, the group quotas
come through fine. In both cases, we are using 2.6.14 kernels. Any
ideas? Any tests we can run to help sort this out?
Regards,
Andy Liebman
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: https
you look at the
Properties of a Samba share. With 3.0.13 and below, the group quotas
come through fine. In both cases, we are using 2.6.14 kernels. Any
ideas? Any tests we can run to help sort this out?
Regards,
Andy Liebman
--
To unsubscribe from this list go
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi list,
I'm using Samba 3.0.21 on a FC4 box.
When copying files using smbclient I get huge speed differences between
put and get commands.
smb: \ put backup.tar
putting file backup.tar as \backup.tar (543.0 kb/s) (average 543.0 kb/s)
smb: \ get backup.tar
getting
or overwritten.
Any comments or insights into where you are heading with this?
Andy Liebman
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I tried to access these shares from Windows XP Pro SP2 and got identical
results. Ext3 filesystems smaller than 2 GB work fine. Anything bigger
than 2 GB and xfs filesystems of any size fails.
I guess I'm going to have to resort to reading code, posting on bugzilla
machines over 10 Gigabit Ethernet??
Andy Liebman
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
you actually put MORE than 2 TBs of data into
that space that says there are 3.12 TB?
Andy
greez
andy liebman wrote:
I have noticed recently that Windows XP seems to stop writing into
Linux/Samba shares once there is 2 TB of data in the share. Windows
Explorer is happy to report that a share
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2006-01-11 at 18:49 -0500, andy liebman wrote:
Thanks for the input, please see below.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
hi,
i´m sorry, but i cannot ack to this report.
we have for example one server with 3,12TB (each share shows this space,
no quotas set)and win xp
in it.
Is this a known limitation of a) Windows or b) Samba or c) both? It
certainly isn't a limitation of the filesystem I'm using.
Andy Liebman
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
46 matches
Mail list logo
