Peter Polkinghorne
2002-Jul-09 01:44 UTC
[Samba] Oplocks - samba 2.2.4 & Windows 2000 server
In investigating some performance issues (elderly server with just 10Mbps ethernet), I noticed that smbstatus reported hardly any open files with oplocks. In particular files opened with Office 2000 & XP stay un-oplocked. I have checked and testparm claims oplocks are enabled and manual says this is so by default. The clients are all Windows 2000 servers - so we have 1 samba connection with multiple users. The Samba servers are 2.2.4 on Solaris 2.6. I am concerned because this means excess data traffic and lost opportunity for performance boost. Is there something on the Windows side I need to do? I assume Samba is OK (initially thought not as thought no oplocks being used ...) -- Peter Polkinghorne, IT Manager KSB Law, 14 Old Square, Tel: +44 (0) 20 7447 1200 Lincoln's Inn, Fax: +44 (0) 20 7831 2915 London WC2A 3UB Web: http://www.ksblaw.co.uk United Kingdom DX 141 LONDON A list of names of the partners is open to inspection at the above address.
Beware of oplocks. They often cause a lot of trouble (file corruption). This happens even in all windows environment, according to people on this list. The worse the network the more the trouble. And, they may degrade performance and increase network traffic, again, according to some people on this list. I would look at the samba mail archives before you try to enable them. To paraphrase a well know English author: Oplocks are more honored in the disabling of them. Joel Joel On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 09:42:30AM +0100, Peter Polkinghorne wrote:> > In investigating some performance issues (elderly server with just 10Mbps > ethernet), I noticed that smbstatus reported hardly any open files with > oplocks. In particular files opened with Office 2000 & XP stay un-oplocked. > > I have checked and testparm claims oplocks are enabled and manual says this > is so by default. > > The clients are all Windows 2000 servers - so we have 1 samba connection with > multiple users. The Samba servers are 2.2.4 on Solaris 2.6. > > I am concerned because this means excess data traffic and lost opportunity > for performance boost. > > Is there something on the Windows side I need to do? I assume Samba is OK > (initially thought not as thought no oplocks being used ...) > > -- > Peter Polkinghorne, IT Manager > > KSB Law, > 14 Old Square, Tel: +44 (0) 20 7447 1200 > Lincoln's Inn, Fax: +44 (0) 20 7831 2915 > London WC2A 3UB Web: http://www.ksblaw.co.uk > United Kingdom DX 141 LONDON > > A list of names of the partners is open to inspection at the above address. > > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the > instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
Heh, funny you should say that. Check www.act.com and search their knowledge base. You'll find that ACT! does not work on any server that has OpLocks enabled, including Windows and Netware. What makes this difficult though is that OpLocks has to be turned off for ACT! to function, and the only way to do so is to modify the registry on windows. If any service pack is applied, the setting goes back to "on". I had one client that I moved from a Windows 98 "server" to a linux server, and they extensively used ACT!. They kept getting corruption and I had to keep restoring from tape. It got rather frustating, and I eventually found that info burried in act's knowledge base. This, BTW, was the first linux server I deployed for a client in leu of a NT server, so I was really nervous that it was linux or samba's fault. Now every server I deploy has oplocks off, because of the crap I went through with that client. Aton. At 05:39 AM 7/9/2002 -0400, you wrote:>Beware of oplocks. They often cause a lot of trouble (file corruption). This >happens even in all windows environment, according to people on this list. >The worse the network the more the trouble. And, they may degrade >performance and increase network traffic, again, according to some people on >this list. I would look at the samba mail archives before you try to enable >them. >To paraphrase a well know English author: >Oplocks are more honored in the disabling of them. >Joel > >Joel >On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 09:42:30AM +0100, Peter Polkinghorne wrote: >> >> In investigating some performance issues (elderly server with just 10Mbps >> ethernet), I noticed that smbstatus reported hardly any open files with >> oplocks. In particular files opened with Office 2000 & XP stay un-oplocked. >> >> I have checked and testparm claims oplocks are enabled and manual says this >> is so by default. >> >> The clients are all Windows 2000 servers - so we have 1 samba connection with >> multiple users. The Samba servers are 2.2.4 on Solaris 2.6. >> >> I am concerned because this means excess data traffic and lost opportunity >> for performance boost. >> >> Is there something on the Windows side I need to do? I assume Samba is OK >> (initially thought not as thought no oplocks being used ...) >> >> -- >> Peter Polkinghorne, IT Manager >> >> KSB Law, >> 14 Old Square, Tel: +44 (0) 20 7447 1200 >> Lincoln's Inn, Fax: +44 (0) 20 7831 2915 >> London WC2A 3UB Web: http://www.ksblaw.co.uk >> United Kingdom DX 141 LONDON >> >> A list of names of the partners is open to inspection at the above address. >> >> >> -- >> To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the >> instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba > >-- >To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the >instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba >