Jeremy Allison wrote:
On Wed, Jun 14, 2006 at 04:27:18PM -0500, Logan Shaw wrote:
It seems to me that, in most cases (there are exceptions),
doing a "kill -9" isn't any more harmful than the machine
crashing or power being lost. How resistant is smbd to the
machine losing power? Would the same risk exist?
They are not quite equivalent as power being lost loses
all data not flushed to disk (if a non-journaling filesystem
is being used). But the same risk is present.
Jeremy.
Nonetheless, if a "stop" and a "kill" don't do it, there isn't much
option left.....at least not that I'm aware of. And if there is, I'd be
more than happy to use it instead of kill -9. (Maybe kill -15 or
something??) I dunno. In any even, I'm still doing my best to trace
one of the problem processes, as Jerry suggested, from the production
environment. Just have to wait until it rears its ugly head again
(which oughtta be tomorrow, if past behavior is a precedent for future
behavior). Thanks for all the input on this fellas, I appreciate it!
Best,
Ryan
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
