Hi, everybody!
I have been using samab on Debian for years and I have recently migrated
my file server from version 3.0.14a-3sarge2 to 3.0.24-6etch4.
One or our applications stores its data in a shared folder. This data is
distributed in over 29000 files of about 1k-40k and is so much slower
when it runs on the new server.
I have thoroughly revised both smb.conf files, but can't see significant
differences. I have read them so much that probably I'm already obfuscated.
I have tuned socket options, but can't see any improvement.
Any ideas?
Thanks in advance
--
=============================Felipe Mart?nez Hermo
felipe@galicia.ugt.org
fmartinez@galicia.ugt.org
=============================Servicios Inform?ticos
UGT Galicia
informatica@galicia.ugt.org
ugtgalicia@gmail.com
==============================
New server max. Version 3.0.24-6etch4. Old server clarence. Version
3.0.14a-3sarge2
WARNING: You have some share names that are longer than 12 characters.
These may not be accessible to some older clients.
(Eg. Windows9x, WindowsMe, and smbclient prior to Samba 3.0.)
Server role: ROLE_DOMAIN_PDC
Loaded services file OK.
# Global parameters
[global]
workgroup = UGTGALICIA
server string = Max. Servidor de disco de UGT Galicia
obey pam restrictions = Yes
passdb backend = tdbsam
pam password change = Yes
passwd program = /usr/bin/passwd %u
passwd chat = *Enter\snew\sUNIX\spassword:* %n\n
*Retype\snew\sUNIX\spassword:* %n\n *password\supdated\ssuccessfully* .
unix password sync = Yes
log level = 0 auth:2
syslog = 0
log file = /var/log/samba/log.%m
max log size = 1000
time server = Yes
deadtime = 15
fam change notify = No
max disk size = 5000
socket options = IPTOS_LOWDELAY TCP_NODELAY SO_SNDBUF=4096
SO_RCVBUF=4096
add machine script = /usr/sbin/useradd -s /bin/false -d
/var/lib/nobody %u
logon script = scripts/%U.bat
logon path = \\%h\profiles\%U
logon drive = z:
domain logons = Yes
os level = 65
preferred master = Yes
domain master = Yes
dns proxy = No
ldap ssl = no
utmp = Yes
panic action = /usr/share/samba/panic-action %d
invalid users = root
create mask = 0700
force create mode = 0700
directory mask = 0700
force directory mode = 0700
hosts allow = 172.15.1., 127.0.0.1
printing = cups
print command lpq command = %p
lprm command
[homes]
comment = Carpetas de Usuarios
path = /home/%u
valid users = %S
read only = No
browseable = No
[informatica]
comment = Servicios Informaticos
path = /home/informatica
valid users = @informatica
force group = informatica
read only = No
create mask = 0770
force create mode = 0770
security mask = 0770
directory mask = 0770
force directory mode = 0770
directory security mask = 0770
Loaded services file OK.
# Global parameters
[global]
workgroup = GALICIA
server string = %h server (Samba %v)
passdb backend = tdbsam, guest
log file = /var/log/samba/log.%m
max log size = 1000
socket options = IPTOS_LOWDELAY TCP_NODELAY SO_SNDBUF=4096
SO_RCVBUF=4096
printcap name = cups
domain logons = Yes
os level = 64
preferred master = Yes
domain master = Yes
dns proxy = No
wins support = Yes
ldap ssl = no
panic action = /usr/share/samba/panic-action %d
hosts allow = 172.15.1., 127.
printing = cups
print command lpq command lprm command
[homes]
comment = Home Directories
invalid users = root
read only = No
create mask = 0700
directory mask = 0700
force directory mode = 0700
browseable = No
[informatica]
comment = Servicios Informaticos
path = /home/informatica
force group = informatica
read only = No
create mask = 0770
force create mode = 0770
force security mode = 0770
force directory mode = 0770
directory security mask = 0770
force directory security mode = 0770
Felipe Martinez Hermo wrote:> > > > Hi, everybody! > > I have been using samab on Debian for years and I have recently > migrated my file server from version 3.0.14a-3sarge2 to 3.0.24-6etch4. > One or our applications stores its data in a shared folder. This data > is distributed in over 29000 files of about 1k-40k and is so much > slower when it runs on the new server. > > I have thoroughly revised both smb.conf files, but can't see > significant differences. I have read them so much that probably I'm > already obfuscated. > > I have tuned socket options, but can't see any improvement. > Any ideas? > > Thanks in advance >how are your settings in /proc/sys/vm/*? If you've got the RAM, turn down the vfs_cache_pressure - you should get more hits. Also, what file system are you using?
Sinisa Bandin escribi?:> > > Felipe Martinez Hermo wrote: >> >>>> OK, so we're apples to apples, so to speak; the servers are tuned >>>> the same. I'll assume your disks are tuned from hdparm and up to >>>> snuff, otherwise you wouldn't be tuning sockets ;). Did your old >>>> server have samba settings for oplocks set? >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Peace and Blessings, >>>> -Scott. >>>> >>>> "Of course, that's just my opinion; I could be wrong" >>>> -Dennis Miller >>> Erm, sorry, I didn't catch that you had 2 .conf files there. I'm >>> back to the drawing board. Sorry about that. Anyone else have any >>> ideas? >> Yes, that's whats shocking me. Apparently we're apples to apples. >> Except for the kernel (new&slow 2.6.18-4-686 vs old&fast 2.6.8) >> >> I've sniffed both eth0 interfaces and I've got some more information. >> When talking to the slow server, the client needs to send 76 "TCP >> segment of a reassembled PDU" that are not sent when talking to the >> old and fast server. >> >> How can I workaround this issue? Should I lower server's MTU? How much? >> >> Thank you > Do you happen to have a Realtek 8169 based gigabit ethernet in new > server? > > If you do, I had the same problem several times last year, and solved > all of them by changing motherboards (all were integrated, and I like > them to stay that way because I can achieve full gigabit speed with > several concurent clients) > > Best regards, > Sinisa Bandin > >No, machines are out-of-the-box HP DL servers: Ethernet controller: Broadcom Corporation NetXtreme BCM5705_2 Gigabit Ethernet (rev 03) I've made a spreadsheet with summarizing wireshark results and comparing results for both servers. You can see it here: http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=pnLL2fInqFq2YKuZIphtQdA It's meaningful that fast server makes 406 Trans2 calls, while slow server makes 616 calls to perform the same operation. The difference is mainly in QUERY_PATH_INFO (200 vs 305) and FIND_FIRST2 (94 vs 199) calls. Next try: change ethernet wire? :-? -- =============================Felipe Mart?nez Hermo felipe@galicia.ugt.org fmartinez@galicia.ugt.org =============================Servicios Inform?ticos UGT Galicia informatica@galicia.ugt.org ugtgalicia@gmail.com ==============================