Hi! I'd rather assume an oplock break. As long as you're alone on the file, it's fast. Once somebody else opens (or even just takes a look at) the file, it's slow. This can be confirmed with a network trace.
Volker On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 09:49:23AM -0400, Lang, Rich wrote: > Well, it just gets "curiouser and curiouser". > > I downloaded, built and installed the latest stable version of Samba (i.e. > 3.5.9) on my "inactive" cluster member which is running RedHat ES 5.6. In > case I didn't show this before, here's the output of `uname -a`: > Linux mustang1 2.6.18-238.9.1.el5 #1 SMP Fri Mar 18 12:42:04 EDT 2011 i686 > i686 i386 GNU/Linux > Anyway, I create a share and copied the "troublesome" file to that share and > opened it using the VB application that showed such poor performance. It > opened the file and processed it as quickly as if it were on my local hard > drive. This is more like it. This is back to how the share used to respond. > When I navigated back to the original copy of the file, the performance went > to pieces again. > Same file, different versions of Samba, different performance. Looks like I > "fixed" it, although I don't know exactly what was wrong. > So, I wanted to take a wireshark snapshot of the "poor performance" to see if > the client was negotiating the buffer size down over the wire. In the > meantime, the original file and its folder were moved from the Samba share to > a M$ share on another server. Oh well - I copied the file back to the Samba > share. Guess what? The performance is great - back to where it was before > the problem started. > So - it's not the version of Samba. It looks like this is an inode > corruption on the disk, although I've run fsck a number of times on the disk > and it always comes up clean. > Hmmmm...there might be some tools that I need to use to keep my shared disk > clean. We're running the cluster through a pair of HP SmartArray 642 SCSI > interfaces both connected to an MSA 500 G2 disk array with redundant > controllers. There are four logical disks defined, each of which is defined > as part of a cluster service so it can swing between cluster members in case > of a failure. Does anyone use this kind of disk array in a shared > configuration like this? > > Richard G. Lang > Sr. Software Engineer > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> > (330) 659-3312 > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the > instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba -- SerNet GmbH, Bahnhofsallee 1b, 37081 Göttingen phone: +49-551-370000-0, fax: +49-551-370000-9 AG Göttingen, HRB 2816, GF: Dr. Johannes Loxen -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
