On 04/16/10 15:00, lheck...@users.sourceforge.net wrote:
We're trying to migrate RHEL3 and CentOS4 based samba servers over to
CentOS5,
but it's a bleeding disaster. We cannot get it to work reliably with any
version of CentOS5, i386 or x86_64, the included 3.0.x version of samba or
Daniel Bird writes:
[...]
However, at the risk of being a pedant, that doesn't give us a
explanation as to why the same setup on CentOS RHEL resulted in the
behavior we experienced. NFS mounts are surely not that uncommon on
samba servers and one would expect the locking mechanisms to
lheck...@users.sourceforge.net wrote:
Daniel Bird writes:
[...]
However, at the risk of being a pedant, that doesn't give us a
explanation as to why the same setup on CentOS RHEL resulted in the
behavior we experienced. NFS mounts are surely not that uncommon on
samba servers and one
From: Daniel Bird db...@sgul.ac.uk
Setting locking = No in the globals of smb.conf
fixed it.
Keep in mind that:
Be careful about disabling locking either globally or in a specific
service, as lack of locking may result in data corruption. You
should never need to set this parameter.
On 04/16/2010 04:23 PM, John Doe wrote:
From: Daniel Birddb...@sgul.ac.uk
Setting locking = No in the globals of smb.conf
fixed it.
Keep in mind that:
Be careful about disabling locking either globally or in a specific
service, as lack of locking may result in data corruption.
Daniel Bird wrote:
On 04/16/2010 04:23 PM, John Doe wrote:
From: Daniel Birddb...@sgul.ac.uk
Setting locking = No in the globals of smb.conf
fixed it.
Keep in mind that:
Be careful about disabling locking either globally or in a specific
service, as lack of locking may result
Can't you samba-export at the source instead of the nfs mount? Even if it
works
it seems like an inefficient way to do things.
Yes, that makes perfect sense and thats the second stage of our
migration from the old E450 Solaris 8 box (which hosted everything via
a single samba
Am Freitag, den 16.04.2010, 15:00 +0200 schrieb
lheck...@users.sourceforge.net:
We're trying to migrate RHEL3 and CentOS4 based samba servers over to CentOS5,
but it's a bleeding disaster. We cannot get it to work reliably with any
version of CentOS5, i386 or x86_64, the included 3.0.x
Someone wrote:
We're trying to migrate RHEL3 and CentOS4 based samba servers over to
CentOS5, but it's a bleeding disaster. We cannot get it to work reliably
with any version of CentOS5, i386 or x86_64, the included 3.0.x version
of samba or 3.4.x/3.5.x compiled from source.
snip
Here's a
Here's a question: are you using your old configuration files? You might
want to compare the default from the install with the old ones - there may
be deprecated or defunct or invalid options.
Have used the same smb.conf for years on RHEL3 while moving from 3.0.x to
3.[2-4].x.
On Fri, 2010-04-16 at 14:29 +0100, lheck...@users.sourceforge.net wrote:
Here's a question: are you using your old configuration files? You might
want to compare the default from the install with the old ones - there may
be deprecated or defunct or invalid options.
Have used the same
From: lheck...@users.sourceforge.net lheck...@users.sourceforge.net
The symptoms are: read access is extremely slow, write access
seems to work in principle (e.g. creating a zeros-sized file on
a share), but writing even small files (100k) to the share eventually
times out with out of
On 16/04/2010 14:00, lheck...@users.sourceforge.net wrote:
We're trying to migrate RHEL3 and CentOS4 based samba servers over to
CentOS5,
but it's a bleeding disaster. We cannot get it to work reliably with any
version of CentOS5, i386 or x86_64, the included 3.0.x version of samba or
Christoph Maser a écrit :
We're trying to migrate RHEL3 and CentOS4 based samba servers over to
CentOS5,
but it's a bleeding disaster. We cannot get it to work reliably with any
version of CentOS5, i386 or x86_64, the included 3.0.x version of samba or
3.4.x/3.5.x compiled from source.
Brian Sr wrote:
On Fri, 2010-04-16 at 14:29 +0100, lheck...@users.sourceforge.net wrote:
Here's a question: are you using your old configuration files? You might
want to compare the default from the install with the old ones - there may
be deprecated or defunct or invalid options.
Have
From: Daniel Bird db...@sgul.ac.uk
Setting locking = No in the globals of smb.conf
fixed it.
Keep in mind that:
Be careful about disabling locking either globally or in a specific
service, as lack of locking may result in data corruption. You
should never need to set this parameter.
JD
16 matches
Mail list logo
