On Thu, 3 Nov 2005, Jeremy Allison wrote:
Here is the last one just before the machine ran out of swap (this process
had around 116MB allocated, IIRC). None of these numbers are that big (and
if the numbers are in bytes surely they are negligable). The thing that is
changing over time is the number of "passdb internal SAM_ACCOUNT
allocation" entries. This machine is running security=user with passdb
backend=tdbsam.
Ok, looks like a passdb leak (I hate that interface :-). What version
exactly are you running again ? Where did you get the source code ?
I want to do a diff against the latest SAMBA_3_0 SVN to see if we've
already fixed it and can give you the patch.
Further to my previous reply, 3.0.20b seems to exhibit the same behaviour
as 3.0.14.
Thanks for following up on this, I've been busy with other things but this
is still on my list to look at. Can you post me the smbcontrol pool detail
output from 3.0.20b (as this is a much more modern code base than 3.0.14a)
and tell me exactly what you're doing to reproduce the leak ?
Hmm. smbcontrol <pid> pool-usage just returns 0 with 3.0.20b here, so
that's not a lot of use.
The clients are Windows 2000 machines running in a workgroup. The samba
server is running security=user with passdb backend=tdbsam. There is no
domain running. The clients are mapping a drive and then just using it
throughout the day. They are run a DOS-based FoxPro database (AIUI) from
the mapped drive.
--
Stephen
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
