Volker Lendecke wrote:
Sorry, David, but that description is not completely correct. The Solaris fcntl
scaling problem does *not* happen on files that are shared to users, it happens
on the internal Samba .tdb-files.
Thanks, I didn't realize that both of these were
aspects of
On Thu, Sep 05, 2002 at 07:58:44AM -0700, Jeff Mandel wrote:
Could you provide some details the bug in Solaris? 2.2.2 used to work
fine for me, but recently it has fallen apart. 2.2.5 behaves the same. I
can think of a recent jumbo patch cluster installation that might be to
blame, but
On Thu, Sep 05, 2002 at 10:42:41AM -0700, Jeff Mandel wrote:
It sounds like there are two scenarios here:
1) Locking performance problems on dbm-style databases shared with PCs.
(We're not using any of those)
No - it's nothing to do with this.
2) Race conditions caused by ??? (We have
On Thu, Sep 05, 2002 at 01:02:17PM -0400, David Collier-Brown wrote:
It doesn't affect the performance of Samba on
Solaris in general, and oddly enough it doesn't
seem to hit MS Access...
Sorry, David, but that description is not completely correct. The Solaris fcntl
One of our servers crashed and when we booted it again one Samba process hung and grabbed one of the servers cpu's. When we killed the samba process, another process generated 100% load on one cpu. From the log file:
smbd/open.c:open_mode_check(555)
open_mode_check: exlusive oplock left by
On Thu, Sep 05, 2002 at 08:59:36AM +0200, Johannes Tyve wrote:
One of our servers crashed and when we booted it again one Samba process
hung and grabbed one of the servers cpu's. When we killed the samba
process, another process generated 100% load on one cpu. From the log
file:
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2002 13:14:41 +
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Johannes Tyve [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: System documentation of Samba
On Thu, Sep 05, 2002 at 08:59:36AM +0200, Johannes Tyve wrote:
One of our servers crashed and when we booted it again one Samba
Jeff Mandel wrote:
Could you provide some details the bug in Solaris? 2.2.2 used to work
fine for me, but recently it has fallen apart. 2.2.5 behaves the same. I
can think of a recent jumbo patch cluster installation that might be to
blame, but I'd like to know if it's possible to track it
David Collier-Brown wrote:
Jeff Mandel wrote:
Could you provide some details the bug in Solaris? 2.2.2 used to work
fine for me, but recently it has fallen apart. 2.2.5 behaves the same. I
can think of a recent jumbo patch cluster installation that might be to
blame, but I'd like to know if
