[Samba] Too many opened files....samba 3.0.28a
An XP client is having an issue with my 3.0.28a server. They do not have this problem on a native w2003 file server with the same amount of data. [2008/08/20 13:25:14, 5] smbd/dir.c:OpenDir(1079) OpenDir: Can't open DowningShotgun/DowningTest/DowningTest.files/sample. Too many open files [2008/08/20 13:25:14, 3] smbd/filename.c:scan_directory(586) scan dir didn't open dir [DowningShotgun/DowningTest/DowningTest.files/sample] [2008/08/20 13:25:14, 3] smbd/error.c:error_packet_set(106) error packet at smbd/nttrans.c(649) cmd=162 (SMBntcreateX) NT_STATUS_TOO_MANY_OPENED_FILES I adjusted the max open files parameter in smb.conf to 1,000,000 files: max open files = 100 Let me ask you this...is this max count tied to each smbd process or is this an aggregate number bound to all smbd processes? Thanks, Bill Pappas - Enterprise Network Storage Architect St. Jude Children's Research Hospital 332 North Lauderdale Memphis, TN 38105 901.495.4549 -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] Too many opened files....samba 3.0.28a
RHEL 4 U4 EMT64 From: Jeremy Allison [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2008 3:26 PM To: Pappas, Bill Cc: samba@lists.samba.org Subject: Re: [Samba] Too many opened filessamba 3.0.28a On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 01:41:21PM -0500, Pappas, Bill wrote: An XP client is having an issue with my 3.0.28a server. They do not have this problem on a native w2003 file server with the same amount of data. What platform is Samba running on ? -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] Too many opened files....samba 3.0.28a
Ok. I matched /proc/sys/fs/file-max (i.e 1,000,000) to the max open files parameter in smb.conf. This did the trick. Apparently an application on a CIFS client (running WINXP) opens many, many files. I appreciate your help. Thanks, bp From: Jeremy Allison [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2008 3:31 PM To: Pappas, Bill Cc: Jeremy Allison; samba@lists.samba.org Subject: Re: [Samba] Too many opened filessamba 3.0.28a On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 03:27:35PM -0500, Pappas, Bill wrote: RHEL 4 U4 EMT64 Ok, take a look inside /proc for all the existing smbd processes and see if any of them have an outrageous number of open file descriptors. Jeremy. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Open file error....samba 3.0.28a
When I try to open a specific file from a samba share (LSP), the application (on WINXP) says that it could not open the file. The errors pasted below (from the smb client) show something different from anything I've seen before. Usually these kinds of problems are straight forward. In other words, usually this is a permission issue. In this case, it is not. I am trying to open a file called 55620_SAVER.EXE The samba server is LINUX-FILE1 Does anyone have any insight? [2008/04/16 12:16:21, 5] smbd/filename.c:unix_convert(147) unix_convert called on file linux-file1/lsp/LSP-Current-User-Data/smuhammad/55620_Saver/55620_saver.exe [2008/04/16 12:16:21, 10] smbd/statcache.c:stat_cache_lookup(215) stat_cache_lookup: lookup failed for name [LINUX-FILE1/LSP/LSP-CURRENT-USER-DATA/SMUHAMMAD/55620_SAVER/55620_SAVER.EXE] [2008/04/16 12:16:21, 10] smbd/statcache.c:stat_cache_lookup(215) stat_cache_lookup: lookup failed for name [LINUX-FILE1/LSP/LSP-CURRENT-USER-DATA/SMUHAMMAD/55620_SAVER] [2008/04/16 12:16:21, 10] smbd/statcache.c:stat_cache_lookup(215) stat_cache_lookup: lookup failed for name [LINUX-FILE1/LSP/LSP-CURRENT-USER-DATA/SMUHAMMAD] [2008/04/16 12:16:21, 10] smbd/statcache.c:stat_cache_lookup(215) stat_cache_lookup: lookup failed for name [LINUX-FILE1/LSP/LSP-CURRENT-USER-DATA] [2008/04/16 12:16:21, 10] smbd/statcache.c:stat_cache_lookup(215) stat_cache_lookup: lookup failed for name [LINUX-FILE1/LSP] [2008/04/16 12:16:21, 10] smbd/statcache.c:stat_cache_lookup(215) stat_cache_lookup: lookup failed for name [LINUX-FILE1] [2008/04/16 12:16:21, 5] smbd/filename.c:unix_convert(246) unix_convert begin: name = linux-file1/lsp/LSP-Current-User-Data/smuhammad/55620_Saver/55620_saver.exe, dirpath = , start = linux-file1/lsp/LSP-Current-User-Data/smuhammad/55620_Saver/55620_saver.exe [2008/04/16 12:16:21, 10] smbd/mangle_hash2.c:is_mangled(276) is_mangled linux-file1/lsp/LSP-Current-User-Data/smuhammad/55620_Saver/55620_saver.exe ? [2008/04/16 12:16:21, 10] smbd/mangle_hash2.c:is_mangled_component(215) is_mangled_component linux-file1/lsp/LSP-Current-User-Data/smuhammad/55620_Saver/55620_saver.exe (len 11) ? [2008/04/16 12:16:21, 10] smbd/mangle_hash2.c:is_mangled_component(215) is_mangled_component lsp/LSP-Current-User-Data/smuhammad/55620_Saver/55620_saver.exe (len 3) ? [2008/04/16 12:16:21, 10] smbd/mangle_hash2.c:is_mangled_component(215) is_mangled_component LSP-Current-User-Data/smuhammad/55620_Saver/55620_saver.exe (len 21) ? [2008/04/16 12:16:21, 10] smbd/mangle_hash2.c:is_mangled_component(215) is_mangled_component smuhammad/55620_Saver/55620_saver.exe (len 9) ? [2008/04/16 12:16:21, 10] smbd/mangle_hash2.c:is_mangled_component(215) is_mangled_component 55620_Saver/55620_saver.exe (len 11) ? [2008/04/16 12:16:21, 10] smbd/mangle_hash2.c:is_mangled_component(215) is_mangled_component 55620_saver.exe (len 15) ? [2008/04/16 12:16:21, 10] smbd/mangle_hash2.c:is_mangled(276) is_mangled linux-file1 ? [2008/04/16 12:16:21, 10] smbd/mangle_hash2.c:is_mangled_component(215) is_mangled_component linux-file1 (len 11) ? [2008/04/16 12:16:21, 5] smbd/filename.c:unix_convert(384) Intermediate not found linux-file1 [2008/04/16 12:16:21, 3] smbd/error.c:error_packet_set(106) error packet at smbd/nttrans.c(671) cmd=162 (SMBntcreateX) NT_STATUS_OBJECT_PATH_NOT_FOUND [2008/04/16 12:16:21, 5] lib/util.c:show_msg(484) [2008/04/16 12:16:21, 5] lib/util.c:show_msg(494) size=35 smb_com=0xa2 smb_rcls=58 smb_reh=0 smb_err=49152 smb_flg=136 smb_flg2=51201 smb_tid=1 smb_pid=3696 smb_uid=101 smb_mid=31363 smt_wct=0 smb_bcc=0 [2008/04/16 12:16:21, 10] lib/util_sock.c:read_smb_length_return_keepalive(623) got smb length of 41 [2008/04/16 12:16:21, 6] smbd/process.c:process_smb(1067) got message type 0x0 of len 0x29 [2008/04/16 12:16:21, 3] smbd/process.c:process_smb(1068) Transaction 1588 of length 45 [2008/04/16 12:16:21, 5] lib/util.c:show_msg(484) [2008/04/16 12:16:21, 5] lib/util.c:show_msg(494) size=41 smb_com=0x4 smb_rcls=0 smb_reh=0 smb_err=0 smb_flg=24 smb_flg2=55303 smb_tid=1 smb_pid=65279 smb_uid=101 smb_mid=31427 smt_wct=3 smb_vwv[ 0]= 7909 (0x1EE5) smb_vwv[ 1]=65535 (0x) smb_vwv[ 2]=65535 (0x) smb_bcc=0 [2008/04/16 12:16:21, 3] smbd/process.c:switch_message(926) switch message SMBclose (pid 7567) conn 0x552b06c840 [2008/04/16 12:16:21, 4] smbd/uid.c:change_to_user(183) change_to_user: Skipping user change - already user [2008/04/16 12:16:21, 3] smbd/reply.c:reply_close(3338) close fd=28 fnum=7909 (numopen=1) [2008/04/16 12:16:21, 10] locking/locking.c:parse_share_modes(523) parse_share_modes: delete_on_close: 0, num_share_modes: 3 [2008/04/16 12:16:21, 10] locking/locking.c:parse_share_modes(623) parse_share_modes: share_mode_entry[0]: pid = 7567, share_access = 0x7, private_options = 0x40, access_mask = 0x20089, mid = 0x0, type= 0x10, file_id = 349, uid = 20286, flags = 0,
RE: [Samba] Open file error....samba 3.0.28a
Did you verify that SELinux is not getting in the way? It is disabled. # sestatus SELinux status: disabled # Thanks, bp -Original Message- From: Miguel Medalha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2008 1:05 PM To: Pappas, Bill Cc: samba@lists.samba.org Subject: Re: [Samba] Open file errorsamba 3.0.28a Pappas, Bill wrote: When I try to open a specific file from a samba share (LSP), the application (on WINXP) says that it could not open the file Did you verify that SELinux is not getting in the way? -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] Applciation cannot open a file
I'm running 3.0.28a on RHEL 4 U4. The problem I see is tied between an application running on winxp (Altiris Image Browser) and the samba server. The application says it is unable to open specific files. I've tried some things to resolve this. I set force user = root for the share in question. This should have fixed it, but it did not. I set chmod to o+rwx per file. I do not see this problem with accessing files thorough windows explorer, word, excel, etc. Only this application sees this problem I've generated level 10 debug logs to find a clue. I can send them to whoever is interested. The one error that stands out as this application uses 3.0.28a is indicated below, specifically the line Intermediate not found linux-file1 This is unique when compared to another application opening such files. [2008/04/16 12:16:01, 5] smbd/filename.c:unix_convert(246) unix_convert begin: name = linux-file1/lsp/LSP-Current-User-Data/smuhammad/55622/55622-pc_Saver.exe, dirpath = , start = linux-file1/lsp/LSP-Current-User-Data/smuhammad/55622/55622-pc_Saver.exe [2008/04/16 12:16:01, 10] smbd/mangle_hash2.c:is_mangled(276) is_mangled linux-file1/lsp/LSP-Current-User-Data/smuhammad/55622/55622-pc_Saver.exe ? [2008/04/16 12:16:01, 10] smbd/mangle_hash2.c:is_mangled_component(215) is_mangled_component linux-file1/lsp/LSP-Current-User-Data/smuhammad/55622/55622-pc_Saver.exe (len 11) ? [2008/04/16 12:16:01, 10] smbd/mangle_hash2.c:is_mangled_component(215) is_mangled_component lsp/LSP-Current-User-Data/smuhammad/55622/55622-pc_Saver.exe (len 3) ? [2008/04/16 12:16:01, 10] smbd/mangle_hash2.c:is_mangled_component(215) is_mangled_component LSP-Current-User-Data/smuhammad/55622/55622-pc_Saver.exe (len 21) ? [2008/04/16 12:16:01, 10] smbd/mangle_hash2.c:is_mangled_component(215) is_mangled_component smuhammad/55622/55622-pc_Saver.exe (len 9) ? [2008/04/16 12:16:01, 10] smbd/mangle_hash2.c:is_mangled_component(215) is_mangled_component 55622/55622-pc_Saver.exe (len 5) ? [2008/04/16 12:16:01, 10] smbd/mangle_hash2.c:is_mangled_component(215) is_mangled_component 55622-pc_Saver.exe (len 18) ? [2008/04/16 12:16:01, 10] smbd/mangle_hash2.c:is_mangled(276) is_mangled linux-file1 ? [2008/04/16 12:16:01, 10] smbd/mangle_hash2.c:is_mangled_component(215) is_mangled_component linux-file1 (len 11) ? [2008/04/16 12:16:01, 5] smbd/filename.c:unix_convert(384) Intermediate not found linux-file1 [2008/04/16 12:16:01, 3] smbd/error.c:error_packet_set(106) error packet at smbd/nttrans.c(671) cmd=162 (SMBntcreateX) NT_STATUS_OBJECT_PATH_NOT_FOUND linux-file1 is the 3.0.28a netbios name. Again...native windows explorer has no issues with such files. I can open them from Exploere.exe What additional information could I give you? I know it is tied to the winxp application, but maybe, just maybe this is in part a samba issue. Thanks, Bill Pappas - Enterprise Network Storage Architect St. Jude Children's Research Hospital 332 North Lauderdale Memphis, TN 38105 901.495.4549 -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] tdb/tdbutil.c:tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal (rev_2)
What is SJMEMDC15? The name of your domain? or DC? Sounds like you are not running Winbind. If not, then running winbindd should reduce contention on access to the secrets.tdb file. SJMEMDC is a DC. I am not using winbind. I want AD (via MSSFU) to establish our UIDs and GIDs so that other servers (not samba related) can have the same UID/GID mappings. Is there a way to get winbind to use another source to map out UIDs/GIDs? I used winbind when I ran samba 2.x, but I could never get it to use another source to determine UIDs/GIDs. It came up with the numbers on its own. Thanks, Bill Pappas - System Integration Engineer - SAN St. Jude Children's Research Hospital 332 North Lauderdale Memphis, TN 38105 Danny Thomas Tower - Room D1010 Mail Stop 312 901-495-4549 -Original Message- From: Gerald (Jerry) Carter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 7:45 AM To: Pappas, Bill Cc: samba@lists.samba.org Subject: Re: [Samba] tdb/tdbutil.c:tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal (rev_2) -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Pappas, Bill wrote: tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal: alarm (10) timed out for key SJMEMDC15 in tdb /usr/local/samba-3.0.23a/private/secrets.tdb What is SJMEMDC15? The name of your domain? or DC? Sounds like you are not running Winbind. If not, then running winbindd should reduce contention on access to the secrets.tdb file. jerry -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHF1VmIR7qMdg1EfYRAimuAJwPVIVLXg2WPVoYSCcHXlbkuTeFHgCfRB0a AEJViF6i4nxTSPZapqhKpf8= =SQhl -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] tdb/tdbutil.c:tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal (rev_2)
Yup. Look at the man page for idmap_ad(8). Great. I'll take a look. Are there any plans to make the timeout more forgiving an upcoming releases? If I jump to the latest stable version, will there be any tdb fixes that address this issue now? Thanks, Bill Pappas - System Integration Engineer - SAN St. Jude Children's Research Hospital 332 North Lauderdale Memphis, TN 38105 Danny Thomas Tower - Room D1010 Mail Stop 312 901-495-4549 -Original Message- From: Gerald (Jerry) Carter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 8:21 AM To: Pappas, Bill Cc: samba@lists.samba.org Subject: Re: [Samba] tdb/tdbutil.c:tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal (rev_2) -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Pappas, Bill wrote: What is SJMEMDC15? The name of your domain? or DC? Sounds like you are not running Winbind. If not, then running winbindd should reduce contention on access to the secrets.tdb file. SJMEMDC is a DC. I am not using winbind. I want AD (via MSSFU) to establish our UIDs and GIDs so that other servers (not samba related) can have the same UID/GID mappings. Is there a way to get winbind to use another source to map out UIDs/GIDs? I used winbind when I ran samba 2.x, but I could never get it to use another source to determine UIDs/GIDs. It came up with the numbers on its own. Yup. Look at the man page for idmap_ad(8). cheers, jerry -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHF13FIR7qMdg1EfYRAhotAJ9AjzwEa04ImWrU05ZKs+4fHbc9qACcCoVX hS5gulta+vW6NGAdgnQRSXE= =RUcz -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] tdb/tdbutil.c:tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal (rev_2)
I've seen more and more occurrences of the following error (other people have different password servers) on the web. I submitted this question before, but it was never resolved. I've even tried changing the underlying file system (from clustered vxfs to ext3) and I still see the error. Error: [2007/10/17 08:29:33, 0] tdb/tdbutil.c:tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal(82) tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal: alarm (10) timed out for key SJMEMDC15 in tdb /usr/local/samba-3.0.23a/private/secrets.tdb I've been seeing this error on and off for well over 1 year. What happens is that many smb clients (as shown on the client log files) start throwing this error. They cannot reach the smb server. I restart the server and everything is fine for days or weeks until it starts over again. I'm running: # /usr/local/samba/sbin/smbd -V Version 3.0.23a Thanks, Bill Pappas - System Integration Engineer - SAN St. Jude Children's Research Hospital 332 North Lauderdale Memphis, TN 38105 Danny Thomas Tower - Room D1010 Mail Stop 312 901-495-4549 -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] cifs mount issue (cannot read files)
In version 3.0.23a (as a file server), I've noticed that CIFS clients (mount samba shares as cifs) get read errors. For example, if the vi a text file on the share, they get a read error. If the more a text file, nothing comes back, but the prompt. In 3.0.10 (pre configured by Centos, not compiled by me) this is not a problem. Here are my 3.0.23a options during configure: ./configure --prefix /usr/local/samba-3.0.23a --with-smbmount --with-pam --with-pam_smbpass --with-acl-support --disable-iprint --disable-cups I noticed that cifs mount is enabled my default: # ./configure --help| grep -i cifs --with-cifsmountInclude mount.cifs and umount.cifs (Linux only) suppo Any suggestions? Is there a fix in 3.0.25a? Thanks, Bill Pappas - System Integration Engineer - SAN St. Jude Children's Research Hospital 332 North Lauderdale Memphis, TN 38105 Danny Thomas Tower - Room D1010 Mail Stop 312 901-495-4549 -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] tdb_lock failed.... (Interrupted system call)
Has anyone seen any fixes above 3.0.23a that addresses an issue similar to this one? [2007/06/13 14:01:40, 0] tdb/tdbutil.c:tdb_log(783) tdb(/usr/local/samba-3.0.23a/private/secrets.tdb): tdb_lock failed on list 65 ltype=1 (Interrupted system call) [2007/06/13 14:01:40, 0] tdb/tdbutil.c:tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal(82) tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal: alarm (10) timed out for key SJMEMDC06 in tdb /usr/local/samba-3.0.23a/private/secrets.tdb Thanks, Bill Pappas - System Integration Engineer - SAN St. Jude Children's Research Hospital 332 North Lauderdale Memphis, TN 38105 Danny Thomas Tower - Room D1010 Mail Stop 312 901-495-4549 -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] tdb_lock failed.... (Interrupted system call)
Linux RHEL 4 U4 emt_64. I compiled from source. My configure options were: $ ./configure --prefix /usr/local/samba-3.0.23a --with-smbmount --with-pam --with-pam_smbpass --with-acl-support --disable-iprint --disable-cups Thanks, Bill Pappas - System Integration Engineer - SAN St. Jude Children's Research Hospital 332 North Lauderdale Memphis, TN 38105 Danny Thomas Tower - Room D1010 Mail Stop 312 901-495-4549 -Original Message- From: Jeremy Allison [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 4:32 PM To: Pappas, Bill Cc: samba@lists.samba.org Subject: Re: [Samba] tdb_lock failed (Interrupted system call) On Wed, Jun 13, 2007 at 03:01:01PM -0500, Pappas, Bill wrote: Has anyone seen any fixes above 3.0.23a that addresses an issue similar to this one? [2007/06/13 14:01:40, 0] tdb/tdbutil.c:tdb_log(783) tdb(/usr/local/samba-3.0.23a/private/secrets.tdb): tdb_lock failed on list 65 ltype=1 (Interrupted system call) [2007/06/13 14:01:40, 0] tdb/tdbutil.c:tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal(82) tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal: alarm (10) timed out for key SJMEMDC06 in tdb /usr/local/samba-3.0.23a/private/secrets.tdb What platform are you running on ? I don't know of any specific issue around this, but we've definately done some work on tdb since 3.0.23. Jeremy. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] tdb_lock failed.... (Interrupted system call)
Is there a way to throttle this? Under such circumstances, I have to kill samba and restart it. Thanks, Bill Pappas - System Integration Engineer - SAN St. Jude Children's Research Hospital 332 North Lauderdale Memphis, TN 38105 Danny Thomas Tower - Room D1010 Mail Stop 312 901-495-4549 -Original Message- From: Volker Lendecke [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 4:44 PM To: Jeremy Allison Cc: Pappas, Bill; samba@lists.samba.org Subject: Re: [Samba] tdb_lock failed (Interrupted system call) On Wed, Jun 13, 2007 at 02:31:47PM -0700, Jeremy Allison wrote: tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal: alarm (10) timed out for key SJMEMDC06 in tdb /usr/local/samba-3.0.23a/private/secrets.tdb What platform are you running on ? I don't know of any specific issue around this, but we've definately done some work on tdb since 3.0.23. 10 seconds very likely sounds like the grab_server_mutex, too many smbd trying to connect the DC at the same time. Volker -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] tdb_lock failed.... (Interrupted system call)
I'm not using (running) winbind in my setup Thanks, Bill Pappas - System Integration Engineer - SAN St. Jude Children's Research Hospital 332 North Lauderdale Memphis, TN 38105 Danny Thomas Tower - Room D1010 Mail Stop 312 901-495-4549 -Original Message- From: Volker Lendecke [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 4:35 PM To: Pappas, Bill Cc: samba@lists.samba.org Subject: Re: [Samba] tdb_lock failed (Interrupted system call) On Wed, Jun 13, 2007 at 03:01:01PM -0500, Pappas, Bill wrote: Has anyone seen any fixes above 3.0.23a that addresses an issue similar to this one? Very likely by starting winbind this will be resolved. Volker -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] tdb_lock failed.... (Interrupted system call)
Here is the core of my config: # Global parameters [global] workgroup = CBT printing = none #bind interfaces only = Yes security = DOMAIN Interfaces = 199.76.2.91/24 127.0.0.1/24 encrypt passwords = Yes obey pam restrictions = Yes password server = 10.1.1.241,10.4.17.19 cups server = none #smb passwd file = /usr/local/samba/private/smbpasswd syslog = 2 log level = 2 log file = /usr/local/samba/var/log.%m max log size = 50 preferred master = No wins server = 10.1.1.202,10.1.1.203,10.1.1.240 #local master = No domain master = no dns proxy = No create mask = 0700 force create mode = 0700 security mask = 0700 directory mask = 0700 directory security mask = 0700 oplock break wait time = 2 strict locking = No wins support = no Thanks, Bill Pappas - System Integration Engineer - SAN St. Jude Children's Research Hospital 332 North Lauderdale Memphis, TN 38105 Danny Thomas Tower - Room D1010 Mail Stop 312 901-495-4549 -Original Message- From: Volker Lendecke [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 4:44 PM To: Jeremy Allison Cc: Pappas, Bill; samba@lists.samba.org Subject: Re: [Samba] tdb_lock failed (Interrupted system call) On Wed, Jun 13, 2007 at 02:31:47PM -0700, Jeremy Allison wrote: tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal: alarm (10) timed out for key SJMEMDC06 in tdb /usr/local/samba-3.0.23a/private/secrets.tdb What platform are you running on ? I don't know of any specific issue around this, but we've definately done some work on tdb since 3.0.23. 10 seconds very likely sounds like the grab_server_mutex, too many smbd trying to connect the DC at the same time. Volker -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] connect_to_domain_password_server: unable to open the domain client session to machine SJMEMDC40. Error was : NT_STATUS_CANT_ACCESS_DOMAIN_INFO
Good afternoon. I cannot seem to get my test samba (domain member) server to use a windows 2003 PDC, SJMEMDC40. Are there any outstanding issues with a win2003 PDC and a samba domain member server? Her are my errors: [2006/08/16 16:40:46, 0] rpc_client/cli_pipe.c:get_schannel_session_key(2443) get_schannel_session_key: could not fetch trust account password for domain 'CBT' [2006/08/16 16:40:46, 0] rpc_client/cli_pipe.c:cli_rpc_pipe_open_schannel(2673) cli_rpc_pipe_open_schannel: failed to get schannel session key from server SJMEMDC40 for domain CBT. [2006/08/16 16:40:46, 0] auth/auth_domain.c:connect_to_domain_password_server(112) connect_to_domain_password_server: unable to open the domain client session to machine SJMEMDC40. Error was : NT_STATUS_CANT_ACCESS_DOMAIN_INFO. [2006/08/16 16:40:46, 0] auth/auth_domain.c:domain_client_validate(206) domain_client_validate: Domain password server not available. I'm running 3.0.23a [EMAIL PROTECTED] var]# more ../lib/smb.conf # Global parameters [global] workgroup = CBT printing = none #bind interfaces only = Yes security = DOMAIN #Interfaces = 199.76.2.108/24 127.0.0.1/24 encrypt passwords = Yes obey pam restrictions = Yes password server = 10.4.17.19 cups server = none #smb passwd file = /usr/local/samba/private/smbpasswd syslog = 2 log file = /usr/local/samba/var/log.%m max log size = 50 preferred master = No wins server = 10.1.1.203,10.1.1.202,10.1.1.240 #local master = No domain master = no dns proxy = No create mask = 0700 force create mode = 0700 security mask = 0700 directory mask = 0700 directory security mask = 0700 oplock break wait time = 2 wins support = no netbios name = vfscstage netbios aliases = interfaces = 199.76.2.116/255.255.255.0 [workspace_1] path = /test/workspace writable = yes valid users = bpappas Thanks, Bill Pappas - System Integration Engineer - SAN St. Jude Children's Research Hospital 332 North Lauderdale Memphis, TN 38105 Danny Thomas Tower - Room D1010 Mail Stop 312 -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
RE: [Samba] tdb/tdbutil.c:tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal
Jeremy, I was in a position (last night) to upgrade to 3.0.23a. Again, I was using 3.0.21c. If smbd goes into the D state, we can at least eliminate the possibility that it is an unexpected 3.0.21c bug. Thanks, Bill Pappas - System Integration Engineer - SAN St. Jude Children's Research Hospital 332 North Lauderdale Memphis, TN 38105 Danny Thomas Tower - Room D1010 Mail Stop 312 -Original Message- From: Pappas, Bill Sent: Saturday, July 22, 2006 4:01 PM To: Jeremy Allison Cc: samba@lists.samba.org Subject: RE: [Samba] tdb/tdbutil.c:tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal Jeremy Allison wrote: Then it might be an intermittent bug in Veritas. What system call is smbd hanging on ? smbd should never hang in the D wait state unless it's a filesystem bug. I am beginning to believe that this could make sense. Let me emphasize that ./private/secrets.tdb is shared between two samba servers (via clustered vxfs) that are running independently. Only one server runs nmbd at a time as veritas cluster server fails nmbd over between servers as needed. I just figured keeping smbd running up on both servers to reduce failover time. I discovered that I had to share secrets.tdb to ensure that either samba server would remain as a domain member server. Is there another way to do what I am doing? I'd gladly stop sharing this file if I could keep smbd up on both servers. Does smbd need a lock on secrets.tdb? I thought (probably wrong) that only nmbd relied on this file? Further below, you will find some more logs between clients and the server running nmbd and smbd (as the other was sitting idle with smbd running). SJMEMDC05 is a windows domain controller and the other clients are windows explorer clients. When you see these logs, they appear to confirm that secrets.tcb is directly involved, but how would a locking issue with this file cause smbd to go to the D state (and stay)? log.hc-dfinkletest: tdb(/usr/local/samba-3.0.21c/private/secrets.tdb): tdb_lock failed on list 78 ltype=1 (Interrupted system call) log.hc-dfinkletest: tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal: alarm (10) timed out for key SJMEMDC05 in tdb /usr/local/samba-3.0.21c/private/secrets .tdb log.hc-dfinkletest: tdb(/usr/local/samba-3.0.21c/private/secrets.tdb): tdb_lock failed on list 78 ltype=1 (Interrupted system call) log.hc-dfinkletest: tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal: alarm (10) timed out for key SJMEMDC05 in tdb /usr/local/samba-3.0.21c/private/secrets .tdb log.hc-dfinkletest: tdb(/usr/local/samba-3.0.21c/private/secrets.tdb): tdb_lock failed on list 78 ltype=1 (Interrupted system call) log.hc-dfinkletest: tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal: alarm (10) timed out for key SJMEMDC05 in tdb /usr/local/samba-3.0.21c/private/secrets .tdb log.hc-mwang1: tdb(/usr/local/samba-3.0.21c/private/secrets.tdb): tdb_lock failed on list 78 ltype=1 (Interrupted system call) log.hc-mwang1: tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal: alarm (10) timed out for key SJMEMDC05 in tdb /usr/local/samba-3.0.21c/private/secrets.tdb log.hc-mwang1: tdb(/usr/local/samba-3.0.21c/private/secrets.tdb): tdb_lock failed on list 78 ltype=1 (Interrupted system call) log.hc-mwang1: tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal: alarm (10) timed out for key SJMEMDC05 in tdb /usr/local/samba-3.0.21c/private/secrets.tdb log.hc-mwang1: tdb(/usr/local/samba-3.0.21c/private/secrets.tdb): tdb_lock failed on list 78 ltype=1 (Interrupted system call) log.hc-mwang1: tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal: alarm (10) timed out for key SJMEMDC05 in tdb /usr/local/samba-3.0.21c/private/secrets.tdb log.hc-mwang1: tdb(/usr/local/samba-3.0.21c/private/secrets.tdb): tdb_lock failed on list 78 ltype=1 (Interrupted system call) log.hc-mwang1: tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal: alarm (10) timed out for key SJMEMDC05 in tdb /usr/local/samba-3.0.21c/private/secrets.tdb log.hc-mwang1: tdb(/usr/local/samba-3.0.21c/private/secrets.tdb): tdb_lock failed on list 78 ltype=1 (Interrupted system call) log.hc-mwang1: tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal: alarm (10) timed out for key SJMEMDC05 in tdb /usr/local/samba-3.0.21c/private/secrets.tdb log.hc-mwang1: tdb(/usr/local/samba-3.0.21c/private/secrets.tdb): tdb_lock failed on list 78 ltype=1 (Interrupted system call) log.hc-mwang1: tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal: alarm (10) timed out for key SJMEMDC05 in tdb /usr/local/samba-3.0.21c/private/secrets.tdb Thanks, Bill Pappas - System Integration Engineer - SAN St. Jude Children's Research Hospital 332 North Lauderdale Memphis, TN 38105 Danny Thomas Tower - Room D1010 Mail Stop 312 -Original Message- From: Jeremy Allison [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, July 22, 2006 10:56 AM To: Pappas, Bill Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; samba@lists.samba.org Subject: Re: [Samba] tdb/tdbutil.c:tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal On Fri, Jul 21, 2006 at 06:17:09PM -0500, Pappas, Bill wrote: I will say this works for weeks on end w/o a problem. When you say this will not work, why? I've had no real
RE: [Samba] tdb/tdbutil.c:tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal
Thanks for the reply.
I will keep this in mind the next time this happens (your strace suggestion).
I upgraded from 3.0.21c to 3.0.23a as there were several bug fixes that could
be tied to this locking issue with vxfs, though the release notes do not
discuss much on file locking. The issue will probably return even with the
upgrade, but it does address some other issues I've been having in 3.0.21c.
I guess now I am in wait and see mode.
I will ask Veritas about something similar to the GPFS locking parameter you
mentioned.
Thanks,
Bill Pappas - System Integration Engineer - SAN
St. Jude Children's Research Hospital
332 North Lauderdale
Memphis, TN 38105
Danny Thomas Tower - Room D1010
Mail Stop 312
-Original Message-
From: Hansjörg Maurer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 24, 2006 3:04 PM
To: Pappas, Bill
Cc: samba@lists.samba.org
Subject: Re: [Samba] tdb/tdbutil.c:tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal
Hi
we had an comparable issue with gpfs clusterfilesystem from IBM at
11/2005 I posted on samba technical (subject tdb_lock problem on gpfs
filesystem). Smbd went to D state sometimes to in this case.
Mostly we recognized the problem with the tdb files of the printer (
the samba server was acting as a printserver to)
I got the following information from the IBM gpfs list:
Also, Samba uses fcntl locking extensively on these files and may be
maintaining thousands of individual locks. GPFS specifically sets a
limit on the number of fcntl ranges allowed on a file at one time (to
prevent a runaway or deviant application from consuming large amounts of
resources recording such locks). I expect you are exceeding this limit,
but you can configure a larger value: mmchconfig
maxFcntlRangesPerFile=1.
The default is 200 and the acceptable range is currently 10-20
Increasing this (undocumented) value to 1 solves the problem in our
case.
Maybe there is a similar restriction with vertiasFS.
Have you tried to start smbd with an
strace -e fcntl -f smbd
to trace down the system call?
In our case it shows something like
fcntl(18, F_SETLKW, {type=F_WRLCK, whence=SEEK_SET, start=936, len=1}) =
-1 ENOLCK (No locks available)
which indicates a problem with the filesystem.
Greetings
Hansjörg
Pappas, Bill wrote:
Jeremy,
I was in a position (last night) to upgrade to 3.0.23a.
Again, I was using 3.0.21c.
If smbd goes into the D state, we can at least eliminate the possibility
that it is an unexpected 3.0.21c bug.
Thanks,
Bill Pappas - System Integration Engineer - SAN
St. Jude Children's Research Hospital
332 North Lauderdale
Memphis, TN 38105
Danny Thomas Tower - Room D1010
Mail Stop 312
-Original Message-
From: Pappas, Bill
Sent: Saturday, July 22, 2006 4:01 PM
To: Jeremy Allison
Cc: samba@lists.samba.org
Subject: RE: [Samba] tdb/tdbutil.c:tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal
Jeremy Allison wrote:
Then it might be an intermittent bug in Veritas. What system call is
smbd hanging on ? smbd should never hang in the D wait state unless
it's a filesystem bug.
I am beginning to believe that this could make sense. Let me emphasize
that ./private/secrets.tdb is shared between two samba servers (via
clustered vxfs) that are running independently. Only one server runs
nmbd at a time as veritas cluster server fails nmbd over between servers
as needed. I just figured keeping smbd running up on both servers to
reduce failover time. I discovered that I had to share secrets.tdb to
ensure that either samba server would remain as a domain member server.
Is there another way to do what I am doing? I'd gladly stop sharing
this file if I could keep smbd up on both servers. Does smbd need a
lock on secrets.tdb? I thought (probably wrong) that only nmbd relied on
this file?
Further below, you will find some more logs between clients and the
server running nmbd and smbd (as the other was sitting idle with smbd
running). SJMEMDC05 is a windows domain controller and the other clients
are windows explorer clients.
When you see these logs, they appear to confirm that secrets.tcb is
directly involved, but how would a locking issue with this file cause
smbd to go to the D state (and stay)?
log.hc-dfinkletest: tdb(/usr/local/samba-3.0.21c/private/secrets.tdb):
tdb_lock failed on list 78 ltype=1 (Interrupted system call)
log.hc-dfinkletest: tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal: alarm (10)
timed out for key SJMEMDC05 in tdb
/usr/local/samba-3.0.21c/private/secrets
.tdb
log.hc-dfinkletest: tdb(/usr/local/samba-3.0.21c/private/secrets.tdb):
tdb_lock failed on list 78 ltype=1 (Interrupted system call)
log.hc-dfinkletest: tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal: alarm (10)
timed out for key SJMEMDC05 in tdb
/usr/local/samba-3.0.21c/private/secrets
.tdb
log.hc-dfinkletest: tdb(/usr/local/samba-3.0.21c/private/secrets.tdb):
tdb_lock failed on list 78 ltype=1 (Interrupted system call)
log.hc-dfinkletest: tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal: alarm (10
RE: [Samba] tdb/tdbutil.c:tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal
Jeremy Allison wrote: Then it might be an intermittent bug in Veritas. What system call is smbd hanging on ? smbd should never hang in the D wait state unless it's a filesystem bug. I am beginning to believe that this could make sense. Let me emphasize that ./private/secrets.tdb is shared between two samba servers (via clustered vxfs) that are running independently. Only one server runs nmbd at a time as veritas cluster server fails nmbd over between servers as needed. I just figured keeping smbd running up on both servers to reduce failover time. I discovered that I had to share secrets.tdb to ensure that either samba server would remain as a domain member server. Is there another way to do what I am doing? I'd gladly stop sharing this file if I could keep smbd up on both servers. Does smbd need a lock on secrets.tdb? I thought (probably wrong) that only nmbd relied on this file? Further below, you will find some more logs between clients and the server running nmbd and smbd (as the other was sitting idle with smbd running). SJMEMDC05 is a windows domain controller and the other clients are windows explorer clients. When you see these logs, they appear to confirm that secrets.tcb is directly involved, but how would a locking issue with this file cause smbd to go to the D state (and stay)? log.hc-dfinkletest: tdb(/usr/local/samba-3.0.21c/private/secrets.tdb): tdb_lock failed on list 78 ltype=1 (Interrupted system call) log.hc-dfinkletest: tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal: alarm (10) timed out for key SJMEMDC05 in tdb /usr/local/samba-3.0.21c/private/secrets .tdb log.hc-dfinkletest: tdb(/usr/local/samba-3.0.21c/private/secrets.tdb): tdb_lock failed on list 78 ltype=1 (Interrupted system call) log.hc-dfinkletest: tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal: alarm (10) timed out for key SJMEMDC05 in tdb /usr/local/samba-3.0.21c/private/secrets .tdb log.hc-dfinkletest: tdb(/usr/local/samba-3.0.21c/private/secrets.tdb): tdb_lock failed on list 78 ltype=1 (Interrupted system call) log.hc-dfinkletest: tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal: alarm (10) timed out for key SJMEMDC05 in tdb /usr/local/samba-3.0.21c/private/secrets .tdb log.hc-mwang1: tdb(/usr/local/samba-3.0.21c/private/secrets.tdb): tdb_lock failed on list 78 ltype=1 (Interrupted system call) log.hc-mwang1: tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal: alarm (10) timed out for key SJMEMDC05 in tdb /usr/local/samba-3.0.21c/private/secrets.tdb log.hc-mwang1: tdb(/usr/local/samba-3.0.21c/private/secrets.tdb): tdb_lock failed on list 78 ltype=1 (Interrupted system call) log.hc-mwang1: tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal: alarm (10) timed out for key SJMEMDC05 in tdb /usr/local/samba-3.0.21c/private/secrets.tdb log.hc-mwang1: tdb(/usr/local/samba-3.0.21c/private/secrets.tdb): tdb_lock failed on list 78 ltype=1 (Interrupted system call) log.hc-mwang1: tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal: alarm (10) timed out for key SJMEMDC05 in tdb /usr/local/samba-3.0.21c/private/secrets.tdb log.hc-mwang1: tdb(/usr/local/samba-3.0.21c/private/secrets.tdb): tdb_lock failed on list 78 ltype=1 (Interrupted system call) log.hc-mwang1: tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal: alarm (10) timed out for key SJMEMDC05 in tdb /usr/local/samba-3.0.21c/private/secrets.tdb log.hc-mwang1: tdb(/usr/local/samba-3.0.21c/private/secrets.tdb): tdb_lock failed on list 78 ltype=1 (Interrupted system call) log.hc-mwang1: tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal: alarm (10) timed out for key SJMEMDC05 in tdb /usr/local/samba-3.0.21c/private/secrets.tdb log.hc-mwang1: tdb(/usr/local/samba-3.0.21c/private/secrets.tdb): tdb_lock failed on list 78 ltype=1 (Interrupted system call) log.hc-mwang1: tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal: alarm (10) timed out for key SJMEMDC05 in tdb /usr/local/samba-3.0.21c/private/secrets.tdb Thanks, Bill Pappas - System Integration Engineer - SAN St. Jude Children's Research Hospital 332 North Lauderdale Memphis, TN 38105 Danny Thomas Tower - Room D1010 Mail Stop 312 -Original Message- From: Jeremy Allison [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, July 22, 2006 10:56 AM To: Pappas, Bill Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; samba@lists.samba.org Subject: Re: [Samba] tdb/tdbutil.c:tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal On Fri, Jul 21, 2006 at 06:17:09PM -0500, Pappas, Bill wrote: I will say this works for weeks on end w/o a problem. When you say this will not work, why? I've had no real problems with the veritas clustered fs. It adheres to file locking and fcntl operations like any normal local filesystem (ext3). Then it might be an intermittent bug in Veritas. What system call is smbd hanging on ? smbd should never hang in the D wait state unless it's a filesystem bug. Jeremy. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] tdb/tdbutil.c:tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal
Hello. I run samba 3.0.21c on RHEL AS 4 EMT_64 U3 and I've experienced a strange problem where smbd will go (and stay) in the D state. While waiting for IO (possibly), these smbd processes do not respond to client requests, thus samba appears to be down. I could not kill these processes via kill -9 , so I rebooted which worked. The only error I could see out of the ordinary would be (from a smb client entry on the server under ./samba/var). tdb/tdbutil.c:tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal I am not giving much to go on, but I can give more information if you think this error has some link to my problem. Should I upgrade to the latest stable and does it address this error? I will say that ./samba/private is shared between two identical samba servers running smbd simultaneously. By shared, I mean that the ./private directory is on a shared filesystem (via Veritas clustered filesystem). Each server is running its own independent binaries and ./var/locks. But only one server is running nmbd at time. The other one is always ready to start nmbd upon nmbd failure. If secrets.tdb is shared, would this really only be involved with nmbd/smbd during domain membership . BTW - These samba servers are domain members only. Thanks, Bill Pappas - System Integration Engineer - SAN St. Jude Children's Research Hospital 332 North Lauderdale Memphis, TN 38105 Danny Thomas Tower - Room D1010 Mail Stop 312 -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Re: [Samba] tdb/tdbutil.c:tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal
I will say this works for weeks on end w/o a problem. When you say this will not work, why? I've had no real problems with the veritas clustered fs. It adheres to file locking and fcntl operations like any normal local filesystem (ext3). What problems would arise from sharing secrets.tdb? Again, I never have nmbd running on both servers. I do not share any .tdb files under ./var/locks. -- -Original Message- From: Jeremy Allison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Pappas, Bill [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: samba@lists.samba.org samba@lists.samba.org Sent: Fri Jul 21 17:36:29 2006 Subject: Re: [Samba] tdb/tdbutil.c:tdb_chainlock_with_timeout_internal On Fri, Jul 21, 2006 at 04:59:51PM -0500, Pappas, Bill wrote: Hello. I run samba 3.0.21c on RHEL AS 4 EMT_64 U3 and I've experienced a strange problem where smbd will go (and stay) in the D state. While waiting for IO (possibly), these smbd processes do not respond to client requests, thus samba appears to be down. I could not kill these processes via kill -9 , so I rebooted which worked. I am not giving much to go on, but I can give more information if you think this error has some link to my problem. Should I upgrade to the latest stable and does it address this error? Try 3.0.23a, due out today but I doubt it will help you. smbd only gets stuck in the D wait state when the kernel doesn't get back to it. That shouldn't happen on an fcntl call which is a slow system call that should be able to be interrupted by a signal. I'm guessing the Veritas filesystem isn't doing this right. I will say that ./samba/private is shared between two identical samba servers running smbd simultaneously. By shared, I mean that the ./private directory is on a shared filesystem (via Veritas clustered filesystem). Each server is running its own independent binaries and ./var/locks. But only one server is running nmbd at time. The other one is always ready to start nmbd upon nmbd failure. That's almost certainly your problem. The Veritas clustered filesystem is getting the smbd stuck. Why are you doing this (share the tdb directory). It won't work. Jeremy. -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
[Samba] (no subject)
What are the proper sequence/steps to: (1) Join a Samba server to a WIN2K AD domain where two domains reside with a two way trust. I am running 2.2.8a with winbind on RH Advanced Server. - Should smbd or nmbd be running when I run smbpasswd -j DOMAIN -r PDC -U AdminUserType%password? - Should I add the machine to the domain first via Windows Active Direcotry Users and Computers interface before running the smbpassword command above? (2) Make wbinfo --sequence see all domains as CONNECTED? Right now I am running into several scenarios that I cannot reproduce with any consistency. a. wbinfo --sequence DOMAINA DISCONNECTED DOMAINB CONNECTED DOMAINC DISCONNECTED b. wbinfo --sequence DOMAINA DISCONNECTED DOMAINB DISCONNECTED DOMAINC CONNECTED c. wbinfo --sequence DOMAINA CONNECTED DOMAINB CONNECTED DOMAINC CONNECTED Also, even when I can get wbinfo --sequence to see every domain as CONNECTED, getent group will list groups from all three domains, but some groups are missingbut if I go to Windows Active Directory Users and Computers GUI, these missing groups show up. What am I missing here? Here is my smb.conf file. # Samba config file created using SWAT # from 199.76.2.87 (199.76.2.87) # Date: 2003/06/11 12:38:30 # Global parameters [global] workgroup = CBT server string = Advance Server Samba Test Bed security = DOMAIN encrypt passwords = Yes password server = sjmemdc05 smb passwd file = /usr/local/samba/private/smbpasswd log file = /usr/local/samba/var/log.%m max log size = 50 preferred master = No local master = No domain master = No dns proxy = No wins server = 10.1.1.203 winbind uid = 1-65000 winbind gid = 1-65000 template shell = /bin/bash winbind separator = + [printers] comment = All Printers path = /usr/spool/samba printable = Yes browseable = No [public] comment = Public Stuff path = /home/ read only = No available = No [TestShare] path = /home/testshare read only = No create mask = 0700 security mask = 0700 directory mask = 0700 directory security mask = 0700 Bill P -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
