On 02/26/2013 09:28 AM, Björn JACKE wrote:
On 2013-02-25 at 20:35 +0100 Papp Tamas sent off:
It seems, you're right. However in this case the documentation in default
smb.conf is wrong.
there is no default smb.conf shipped with Samba. File a bug against the Samba
package of your distribution
On 2013-02-25 at 20:35 +0100 Papp Tamas sent off:
> It seems, you're right. However in this case the documentation in default
> smb.conf is wrong.
there is no default smb.conf shipped with Samba. File a bug against the Samba
package of your distribution that you use then, please.
> >SMB2 in Samb
On 02/25/2013 07:29 PM, Jeremy Allison wrote:
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 09:38:51AM +0100, Papp Tamas wrote:
hi All,
We have a glusterfs cluster with 5 nodes on Ubuntu 12.04 amd64.
We use this smb.conf:
[global]
socket options = IPTOS_THROUGHPUT TCP_NODELAY IPTOS_LOWDELAY
SO_SNDBUF=13
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 09:38:51AM +0100, Papp Tamas wrote:
> hi All,
>
>
> We have a glusterfs cluster with 5 nodes on Ubuntu 12.04 amd64.
> We use this smb.conf:
>
> [global]
> socket options = IPTOS_THROUGHPUT TCP_NODELAY IPTOS_LOWDELAY
> SO_SNDBUF=131072 SO_RCVBUF=131072
Remove the
hi All,
We have a glusterfs cluster with 5 nodes on Ubuntu 12.04 amd64.
We use this smb.conf:
[global]
socket options = IPTOS_THROUGHPUT TCP_NODELAY IPTOS_LOWDELAY
SO_SNDBUF=131072 SO_RCVBUF=131072
read raw = yes
server string = %h
write raw = yes
#oplo
On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 04:47:56PM +, Steve Tice wrote:
> Jeremy Allison samba.org> writes:
>
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 12:24:04PM -0600, Steve Tice wrote:
> > > Can anybody provide the expected response to an SMB2 CREATE request that
> > > includes ACCESS_SYSTEM_SECURITY in the Desire
Jeremy Allison samba.org> writes:
>
> On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 12:24:04PM -0600, Steve Tice wrote:
> > Can anybody provide the expected response to an SMB2 CREATE request that
> > includes ACCESS_SYSTEM_SECURITY in the DesiredAccess mask? I’m particularly
> > interested in cases where the SMB cli
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 12:24:04PM -0600, Steve Tice wrote:
> Can anybody provide the expected response to an SMB2 CREATE request that
> includes ACCESS_SYSTEM_SECURITY in the DesiredAccess mask? I’m particularly
> interested in cases where the SMB client is connected as an authenticated
> user wit
Can anybody provide the expected response to an SMB2 CREATE request
that includes
ACCESS_SYSTEM_SECURITY in the DesiredAccess mask? I’m particularly interested in
cases where the SMB client is connected as an authenticated user with
administrative
(superuser) privileges on the share, and has made t
Can anybody provide the expected response to an SMB2 CREATE request that
includes ACCESS_SYSTEM_SECURITY in the DesiredAccess mask? I’m particularly
interested in cases where the SMB client is connected as an authenticated
user with administrative (superuser) privileges on the share, and has made
t
On Wed, May 02, 2012 at 04:06:15PM +0800, Zhiming Zhou wrote:
> 于 2012/4/28 14:58, Volker Lendecke 写道:
> >On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 01:46:35PM +0800, Zhiming Zhou wrote:
> >>I use Iometer to test normal file read/write performance,
> >>at first, SMB2 is not enabled,test 1MB sequential read/write perf
于 2012/4/28 14:58, Volker Lendecke 写道:
On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 01:46:35PM +0800, Zhiming Zhou wrote:
I use Iometer to test normal file read/write performance,
at first, SMB2 is not enabled,test 1MB sequential read/write performance
with SMB1, I got 610 MB/s write performance which
is really good
On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 01:46:35PM +0800, Zhiming Zhou wrote:
> I use Iometer to test normal file read/write performance,
> at first, SMB2 is not enabled,test 1MB sequential read/write performance
> with SMB1, I got 610 MB/s write performance which
> is really good, while read performance is just 2
Hi forks:
I've been testing SMB2 with samba 3.6.4 performance these days,
and I find a weird benchmark that SMB2 write performance is
slower than SMB1 in 10Gb ethernet network.
Server
---
Linux: Redhat Enterprise 6.1 x64
Kernel: 2.6.31 x86_64
Samba: 3.6.4 (almost using the def
> What I meant to say is that Thunderbird downloads every message every time
>> it is launched when I have "max protocol = smb2" enabled. Without that line
>> it checks the headers and is done. Even if it's not efficient I don't mind
>> it downloading and caching the message once, but having to do
` Mark Reidenbach wrote:
What I meant to say is that Thunderbird downloads every message every
time it is launched when I have "max protocol = smb2" enabled.�
Without that line it checks the headers and is done.� Even if it's not
efficient I don't mind it downloading and caching the messag
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 5:28 PM, Linda Walsh wrote:
>
> ` Mark Reidenbach wrote:
>
>> I tried enabling SMB2 on our network after upgrading to samba 3.6 and
>> experienced the following problems. Commenting out "Max Protocol = SMB2"
>> makes the windows7 and vista clients happy.
>>
>> - [homes]
` Mark Reidenbach wrote:
I tried enabling SMB2 on our network after upgrading to samba 3.6 and
experienced the following problems. Commenting out "Max Protocol = SMB2"
makes the windows7 and vista clients happy.
- [homes] Trying to open a html file in notepad fails on Windows7 Pro
SP1.
I tried enabling SMB2 on our network after upgrading to samba 3.6 and
experienced the following problems. Commenting out "Max Protocol = SMB2"
makes the windows7 and vista clients happy.
- [homes] Trying to open a html file in notepad fails on Windows7 Pro
SP1. Opening it in Firefox (defau
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 01:40:52PM +0200, Hervé Hénoch wrote:
> I've a Windows 2008 R1 connected to a share on a samba 3.5.6 (this samba
> is a domain member of a samba pdc). All work fine.
3.6 will be the first version to really support SMB2.
> Since the window 2008R1 box can't access the samba
Hi
I've a Windows 2008 R1 connected to a share on a samba 3.5.6 (this samba
is a domain member of a samba pdc). All work fine.
I've enabled "max protocol = smb2" : i can access the share but when it
was impossible to rename a new directory named "New Folder" on the
share (created by Windows
On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 02:51:42PM -0800, Mike Smith wrote:
> Entered on Bugzilla, #7931.
Thanks. I'll take care of it for 3.6.0 final.
Jeremy.
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
Entered on Bugzilla, #7931.
On 11-01-20 11:24 AM, Jeremy Allison wrote:
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 05:51:45PM -0800, Mike Smith wrote:
Thanks for the reply. I have set "max protocol = smb2" and I can use
the SMB2 protocol fine. I'll try and explain my issue better:
When I say "negotiate request"
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 05:51:45PM -0800, Mike Smith wrote:
> Thanks for the reply. I have set "max protocol = smb2" and I can use
> the SMB2 protocol fine. I'll try and explain my issue better:
>
> When I say "negotiate request" and I talking about the packets that
> are sent between the client a
Thanks for the reply. I have set "max protocol = smb2" and I can use the
SMB2 protocol fine. I'll try and explain my issue better:
When I say "negotiate request" and I talking about the packets that are
sent between the client and server. The SMB2 protocol is driven by
requests from the client
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 04:48:29PM -0800, Mike Smith wrote:
> I am using samba 3.5.4 (and have tried 3.5.6) and have noticed that
> samba does not respond to SMB2 negotiate requests. If I use a SMB
> request to negotiate SMB2 it works fine. Does anyone know if there
> is there a reason for this, or
I am using samba 3.5.4 (and have tried 3.5.6) and have noticed that
samba does not respond to SMB2 negotiate requests. If I use a SMB
request to negotiate SMB2 it works fine. Does anyone know if there is
there a reason for this, or is it a bug? I have tried searching for an
answer but haven't b
Can't recall, but is SMB2 on by default in Samba4?
Cheers,
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 06:15:28PM -0800, Daniel Ng wrote:
> I have looked at the trace. It seemed to me that Win 7 had troubles
> accessing wkssvc, srvsvc, etc. Win 7 sent a create request for wksvc
> and then a close request immediately even a positive create response was
> returned. Is there
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 06:15:28PM -0800, Daniel Ng wrote:
> I am trying to setup a SAMBA server using 3.5.0rc2 to test SMB2.
> Without using SMB2, my windows 7 was able to browse the public share
> listed on the server anonymously. However, when SMB2 is enabled, a
> network error message is alway
I am trying to setup a SAMBA server using 3.5.0rc2 to test SMB2.
Without using SMB2, my windows 7 was able to browse the public share
listed on the server anonymously. However, when SMB2 is enabled, a
network error message is always popped up when I try to browse the samba
server from Win 7.
I
31 matches
Mail list logo
