RE: Samba and spinlocks on Linux (was Re: REPOST: Meaning oftdb_free: left read failed at ...?
If you are referring to: lock spin count = lock spin time = They are working very well 2.2.7a thank you. Here are my settings: lock spin count = 50 ;default=10 ;test with 6 wks show anything higher or lower than 15 cause increased load on server with slower performance lock spin time = 15 Regards - Gerald Drouillard Owner and Consultant Drouillard Associates, Inc. http://www.Drouillard.ca -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, February 05, 2003 12:40 PM To: Volker Lendecke Cc: Ralf G. R. Bergs; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Samba and spinlocks on Linux (was Re: REPOST: Meaning of tdb_free: left read failed at ...? On Wed, Feb 05, 2003 at 11:50:50AM +0100, Volker Lendecke wrote: P.S: I might be wrong, but I'm not sure whether the spinlock code ever actually worked. Jeremy? Yes they did work and were tested at one stage, but bit-rot may have occurred since then. Jeremy.
Re: Samba and spinlocks on Linux (was Re: REPOST: Meaning oftdb_free: left read failed at ...?
On Wed, Feb 05, 2003 at 10:21:15AM +0100, Ralf G. R. Bergs wrote: I guess I should have defined CONFIG_RWSEM_GENERIC_SPINLOCK when compiling my kernel since I also configured Samba with --with-spinlocks: Ok, this might explain it. Spinlocks are definitely a less tested part of the code. I have never really activated them. At least under Linux fnctl locks should be fast enough to cope with nearly any load. Would you recommend that I recompile the kernel to enable spinlock support (since this is a two-way SMP machine), or would you rather recommend that I don't use spinlocks (i.e. recompile Samba NOT to try to use spinlocks)? The difference is that without Samba support for spinlocks you get another round-trip into the kernel for each lock. Linux is quite fast with that, so if you do not have a *very* good reason to enable them, could you please retry without spinlocks? Volker P.S: I might be wrong, but I'm not sure whether the spinlock code ever actually worked. Jeremy? msg05802/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Samba and spinlocks on Linux (was Re: REPOST: Meaning oftdb_free: left read failed at ...?
On Wed, 05 Feb 2003 11:50:50 +0100, Volker Lendecke wrote: [...] you do not have a *very* good reason to enable them, could you please retry without spinlocks? Ok, I'm just recompiling Samba without spinlock support. Obviously I have to wait until this night so that the fileserver becomes less loaded to replace Samba. I will get back to you until I can report whether the (original) problem went away. Thanks, Ralf -- L I N U X .~. The Choice /V\ of a GNU /( )\ Generation ^^-^^
