On Mon, 2006-02-27 at 19:11 -0500, Ryan Taylor wrote: > Thank you for the reply, its nice to know someone else is in the same boat. > > Unfortunately our servers are also in production and therefore we can't try > the patch. We also have not found a good way to reproduce without throwing > all the users on the system. > > One interesting fact I have noticed since we have moved our data to the > local samba machine: netstat -s -u returns > # netstat -s -u > Udp: > 50898 packets received > 16 packets to unknown port received. > 0 packet receive errors > 17163 packets sent > # > Where as before when on NFS we had 50%-75% of the number of "packets > received" in "packet receive errors"
Mmm, it's weird. > I am beginning to believe you are right, NFS cannot handle the locking > required by Samba? Please, read the thread "hanging smbd(s) revisited". I think is related to our problems too. > I am confused in two directions. We use Whitebox4 and have noticed a > newer version of nfs.utils.el4 rpm released but requires (because of two > many dependencies) for use to upgrade to CentOS4... 2) We are using AMD X2's > so are running the SMP kernel as well. Could it be just a SMP issue? Which > is why I am curious if anyone else had samba working in an environment > similar to ours. Maybe SMP could affect (I have 4 processors and linux SMP). But in the thread I commented before, people have the same problems with different platforms and configuration. I'm confused. I will wait for some answers in the commented thread. Cheers, -- Fermin Molina Ibarz Tècnic sistemes - ASIC Universitat de Lleida Tel: +34 973 702151 GPG: 0x060F857A -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
