On 05/11/10 01:47 AM, MichaelHoy wrote:
Same thing happened again I'm sorry to say.

This doesn't seem like anything that would be related to smbd.

Why do I suspect smdb - simply because proving access to disk via CIFS is the 
significant activity; agreed its very circumstantial.

The smb service is just a pipeline between the network stack
and the file system; it doesn't access the network interfaces
or the disks directly.  The network stack communicates with
the network interface drivers and the file system communicates
with the storage subsystem, which in turn communicates with
disk drivers.

A bug in the smb service might cause the service to stop working
or perhaps crash the operating system but it is really unlikely
to lock up the entire system.

For assistance with a system lockup, such as you've described,
it would be better to ask for debug assistance on some of the
other forums - perhaps storage-discuss or a network related list.

Alan

Server hung and power off only option.
That's unfortunate. Are there any core files in /, /root or /var/tmp or clues 
in /var/adm/messages.*?

I've checked and there are no cores.
I've checked the messages log and all those in /var/svc/log but they don't 
point me to anything obvious.

I had a number off ssh sessions running.
A curious thing was all were unresponsive except the one running top which was 
happily chugging away and totting up usage.

TOP output starts --------------
last pid:  2863;  load avg:  0.00,  0.00,  0.01;  up 5+05:07:06        17:28:20
70 processes: 69 sleeping, 1 on cpu
CPU states: 99.9% idle,  0.0% user,  0.1% kernel,  0.0% iowait,  0.0% swap
Kernel: 243 ctxsw, 1 trap, 487 intr, 209 syscall, 1 flt
Memory: 4094M phys mem, 429M free mem, 2046M total swap, 2046M free swap

    PID USERNAME NLWP PRI NICE  SIZE   RES STATE    TIME    CPU COMMAND
    570 root        3  59    0   72M   41M sleep    9:46  0.03% Xorg
   1390 gdm         1  59    0  136M   20M sleep    6:19  0.01% gdm-simple-gree
    537 root        1  59    0   12M 6148K sleep    2:10  0.01% intrd
   2183 root        1  59    0 4092K 2616K cpu/2    1:02  0.01% top
     11 root       18  59    0   13M   12M sleep    0:12  0.00% svc.configd
    461 root      426  59    0   21M   14M sleep   18.6H  0.00% smbd
   1384 gdm         2  59    0   98M   37M sleep    1:29  0.00% gnome-settings-
    214 root       56  59    0   12M 5056K sleep    0:12  0.00% nscd
    759 it019       1  59    0   16M 5820K sleep    0:15  0.00% sshd
    400 daemon     22  59    0   21M   11M sleep    0:25  0.00% idmapd
    626 root        1  59    0 6436K 2104K sleep    0:08  0.00% sendmail
    168 root        6  59    0   17M 6020K sleep    0:10  0.00% devfsadm
    479 noaccess    1  59    0 2620K 1524K sleep    0:04  0.00% mdnsd
    477 root       20  59    0   30M   14M sleep    0:33  0.00% fmd
    436 root        4  59    0 9512K 8040K sleep    0:08  0.00% hald
    550 root        1  59    0 3464K 1964K sleep    0:06  0.00% hald-addon-acpi
      9 root       14  59    0   18M   10M sleep    0:05  0.00% svc.startd
last pid:  2863;  load avg:  0.00,  0.00,  0.00;  up 5+05:11:36                 
                                   17:32:50
TOP output ends --------------

I've configured the system to send to a syslog server to assist in determining 
a sequence. As far as I can tell, all was well until 16:16:22 on 10/05/2010.

Up until that time a daemon.debug dialogue is logged between the server, DNS 
and AD whereby DNS is queried (Found _ldap_tcp...),
time synch'd with a AD server (it alternates between which one it chooses) and 
a reference logged each to
smbrdr_ntcreatex: 14 \srvsvc and SmbRdrNtCreate: fid=6 (a new fid appears to be 
created at each invocation up to a max of 49152).

This dialogue happens approx every 10 minutes.

After this time, two new entries appear at the same time - smbrdr_ntcreatex: 18 
\netlogon and thereafter, no DNS activity is logged and the fid for the 
SmbRdrNtCreate seems to jump from 6 when the issues appears
to have occurred to 16386 within 90 minutes.

Any assistance would be appreciated.

Thanks in advance. Michael.

_______________________________________________
cifs-discuss mailing list
cifs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/cifs-discuss

Reply via email to