> From: Daniel Bird
> > Setting locking = No in the globals of smb.conf
> > fixed it.
>
> Keep in mind that:
> "Be careful about disabling locking either globally or in a specific
> service, as lack of locking may result in data corruption. You
> should never need to set this parameter."
>
>
Try
lheck...@users.sourceforge.net wrote:
> Daniel Bird writes:
> [...]
>> However, at the risk of being a pedant, that doesn't give us a
>> explanation as to why the same setup on CentOS & RHEL resulted in the
>> behavior we experienced. NFS mounts are surely not that uncommon on
>> samba servers
Daniel Bird writes:
[...]
> However, at the risk of being a pedant, that doesn't give us a
> explanation as to why the same setup on CentOS & RHEL resulted in the
> behavior we experienced. NFS mounts are surely not that uncommon on
> samba servers and one would expect the locking mechanisms t
On 04/16/10 15:00, lheck...@users.sourceforge.net wrote:
> We're trying to migrate RHEL3 and CentOS4 based samba servers over to
> CentOS5,
> but it's a bleeding disaster. We cannot get it to work reliably with any
> version of CentOS5, i386 or x86_64, the included 3.0.x version of samba or
> Can't you samba-export at the source instead of the nfs mount? Even if it
> works
> it seems like an inefficient way to do things.
>
Yes, that makes perfect sense and thats the second stage of our
migration from the old E450 Solaris 8 box (which hosted everything via
a single samba inst
Daniel Bird wrote:
> On 04/16/2010 04:23 PM, John Doe wrote:
>> From: Daniel Bird
>>
>>> Setting locking = No in the globals of smb.conf
>>> fixed it.
>>>
>> Keep in mind that:
>> "Be careful about disabling locking either globally or in a specific
>> service, as lack of locking may res
On 04/16/2010 04:23 PM, John Doe wrote:
> From: Daniel Bird
>
>> Setting locking = No in the globals of smb.conf
>> fixed it.
>>
> Keep in mind that:
> "Be careful about disabling locking either globally or in a specific
> service, as lack of locking may result in data corruption. You
>
From: Daniel Bird
> Setting locking = No in the globals of smb.conf
> fixed it.
Keep in mind that:
"Be careful about disabling locking either globally or in a specific
service, as lack of locking may result in data corruption. You
should never need to set this parameter."
JD
Brian Sr wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-04-16 at 14:29 +0100, lheck...@users.sourceforge.net wrote:
>>> Here's a question: are you using your old configuration files? You might
>>> want to compare the default from the install with the old ones - there may
>>> be deprecated or defunct or invalid options.
>>
Christoph Maser a écrit :
>> We're trying to migrate RHEL3 and CentOS4 based samba servers over to
>> CentOS5,
>> but it's a bleeding disaster. We cannot get it to work reliably with any
>> version of CentOS5, i386 or x86_64, the included 3.0.x version of samba or
>> 3.4.x/3.5.x compiled from
On 16/04/2010 14:00, lheck...@users.sourceforge.net wrote:
> We're trying to migrate RHEL3 and CentOS4 based samba servers over to
> CentOS5,
> but it's a bleeding disaster. We cannot get it to work reliably with any
> version of CentOS5, i386 or x86_64, the included 3.0.x version of samba o
From: "lheck...@users.sourceforge.net"
> The symptoms are: read access is extremely slow, write access
> seems to work in principle (e.g. creating a zeros-sized file on
> a share), but writing even small files (100k) to the share eventually
> times out with "out of memory or disk space" errors.
On Fri, 2010-04-16 at 14:29 +0100, lheck...@users.sourceforge.net wrote:
> > Here's a question: are you using your old configuration files? You might
> > want to compare the default from the install with the old ones - there may
> > be deprecated or defunct or invalid options.
>
> Have used the
> Here's a question: are you using your old configuration files? You might
> want to compare the default from the install with the old ones - there may
> be deprecated or defunct or invalid options.
Have used the same smb.conf for years on RHEL3 while moving from 3.0.x to
3.[2-4].x.
---
Someone wrote:
>
> We're trying to migrate RHEL3 and CentOS4 based samba servers over to
> CentOS5, but it's a bleeding disaster. We cannot get it to work reliably
> with any version of CentOS5, i386 or x86_64, the included 3.0.x version
> of samba or 3.4.x/3.5.x compiled from source.
Here's a q
Am Freitag, den 16.04.2010, 15:00 +0200 schrieb
lheck...@users.sourceforge.net:
> We're trying to migrate RHEL3 and CentOS4 based samba servers over to CentOS5,
> but it's a bleeding disaster. We cannot get it to work reliably with any
> version of CentOS5, i386 or x86_64, the included 3.0.x vers
16 matches
Mail list logo
