FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > CentOS > CentOS

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 04-16-2010, 01:12 PM
Christoph Maser
 
Default CentOS5 and samba

Am Freitag, den 16.04.2010, 15:00 +0200 schrieb
lhecking@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 version of samba or
> 3.4.x/3.5.x compiled from source.
>
> 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. These shares are home directories NFS-mounted on the
> samba server. Shares of local disks work fine as expected.
>
> We have played with oplock settings and got some improvements, but not
> reliably, and this seems to effect XP and Seven clients differently.
>
> Surely we are not the first to run into this sort of issue? Given the range
> of tested software, the problem appears to be specific to CentOS5.



If this was a general CentOS problem you would propably find tons of
information on bugs.centos.org and bugzilla.redhat.com. I bon't use
samba on CentOS 5 myself but it's really hard to believe that it is a
CentOS related problem. I rather think it is some trivial common problem
like network issues (duplex/speed missmatch) or some problem with the
storage.

Chris



financial.com AG

Munich head office/Hauptsitz München: Maria-Probst-Str. 19 | 80939 München | Germany
Frankfurt branch office/Niederlassung Frankfurt: Messeturm | Friedrich-Ebert-Anlage 49 | 60327 Frankfurt | Germany
Management board/Vorstand: Dr. Steffen Boehnert | Dr. Alexis Eisenhofer | Dr. Yann Samson | Matthias Wiederwach
Supervisory board/Aufsichtsrat: Dr. Dr. Ernst zur Linden (chairman/Vorsitzender)
Register court/Handelsregister: Munich – HRB 128 972 | Sales tax ID number/St.Nr.: DE205 370 553
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 04-16-2010, 01:18 PM
 
Default CentOS5 and samba

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.
<snip>
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.

mark

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 04-16-2010, 01:29 PM
 
Default CentOS5 and samba

> 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.



---------------------------------------------------------------
This message and any attachments may contain Cypress (or its
subsidiaries) confidential information. If it has been received
in error, please advise the sender and immediately delete this
message.
---------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 04-16-2010, 01:54 PM
Brian Sr
 
Default CentOS5 and samba

On Fri, 2010-04-16 at 14:29 +0100, lhecking@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 same smb.conf for years on RHEL3 while moving from 3.0.x to
> 3.[2-4].x.
>


does testparm reveal any issues with the config?

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 04-16-2010, 02:04 PM
John Doe
 
Default CentOS5 and samba

From: "lhecking@users.sourceforge.net" <lhecking@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.
> These shares are home directories NFS-mounted on the samba s
> erver. Shares of local disks work fine as expected.

Just in case, what's your nic MTU...?
Maybe read http://serverfault.com/questions/68330/samba-sharing-an-nfs-mount-point

JD



_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 04-16-2010, 02:10 PM
Daniel Bird
 
Default CentOS5 and samba

On 16/04/2010 14:00, lhecking@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
> 3.4.x/3.5.x compiled from source.
>
> 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. These shares are home directories NFS-mounted on the
> samba server. Shares of local disks work fine as expected.
>
We had a similar after issues migrating from a Solaris 8 2.x Samba
install to CentOS 5 . We had all sorts of timeouts, and weird slowness
and random "read only" messages.

Setting

locking = No

in the globals of smb.conf fixed it.

In our case we suspect it has something to do with locking differences
over NFS between Solaris and CentOS clients accessing a CentOS NFS
server but didn't have time to fully investigate (we were just glad it
got fixed!). If this works for you then maybe there's something more to
investigate...

Dan
> We have played with oplock settings and got some improvements, but not
> reliably, and this seems to effect XP and Seven clients differently.
>
> Surely we are not the first to run into this sort of issue? Given the range
> of tested software, the problem appears to be specific to CentOS5.
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> This message and any attachments may contain Cypress (or its
> subsidiaries) confidential information. If it has been received
> in error, please advise the sender and immediately delete this
> message.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 04-16-2010, 02:25 PM
Niki Kovacs
 
Default CentOS5 and samba

Christoph Maser a crit :

>> 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.
>>
>> 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. These shares are home directories NFS-mounted on the
>> samba server. Shares of local disks work fine as expected.
>>
>> We have played with oplock settings and got some improvements, but not
>> reliably, and this seems to effect XP and Seven clients differently.
>>

We're running a CentOS 5 Samba server in our local town hall, mostly
Linux clients, but also the odd XP machine, with a simple configuration:
one open public share, then a series of protected shares.

http://www.microlinux.fr/doc_en_stock/samba.html

Until now, folks seem to appreciate the setup as "vachement rapide"
(something like : furiously fast).

I have to add that standard servers like Samba, Apache, MySQL, NFS, ...
never (ever) gave me headaches with CentOS. That's why I'm using this
fine distro.

</propaganda>

Cheers from the sunny South of France.

Niki
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 04-16-2010, 02:33 PM
Chan Chung Hang Christopher
 
Default CentOS5 and samba

Brian Sr wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-04-16 at 14:29 +0100, lhecking@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 same smb.conf for years on RHEL3 while moving from 3.0.x to
>> 3.[2-4].x.
>>
>
>
> does testparm reveal any issues with the config?
>

He said shares on local filesystems were fine but shares on NFS were borked.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 04-16-2010, 03:23 PM
John Doe
 
Default CentOS5 and samba

From: Daniel Bird <dbird@sgul.ac.uk>
> 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



_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 04-17-2010, 12:29 PM
Daniel Bird
 
Default CentOS5 and samba

On 04/16/2010 04:23 PM, John Doe wrote:
> From: Daniel Bird<dbird@sgul.ac.uk>
>
>> 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."
>
Indeed, however smb locking still properly reports "this file is in use
by...." etc. on the smb side. If fact it seems to have had little
effect except for now properly reporting who is using the file instead
of always reporting the file is in use and locked by the owner.

Like I said, we still need to investigate more fully however the we see
the issue on all NFS file systems when using the rpms from both the
3.0.33 CentOS and samba-3x series from RedHat 5.5. Like the OP, local
file systems do not exhibit this issue.

D

> JD
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 10:44 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org