samba - Sep 2023 - WG: Update to samba 4.19 Aduc no longer working No login

On Tue, 2023-09-12 at 10:08 +0300, Michael Tokarev via samba
wrote:
> 12.09.2023 09:56, Daniel M?ller via samba:
> > This is realy urgent. Wachting the behaviour of samba 4.19. It is
> > filling  tmpfs /run/lock/samba until
> > 100%:Dateisystem                    Gr??e Benutzt Verf. Verw%
> > Eingeh?ngt
> > aufudev                             63G       0   63G    0%
> > /devtmpfs                            13G    2,4M   13G    1%
> > /run/dev/mapper/dommaster--vg-root  3,6T     17G  3,4T    1%
> > /tmpfs                            63G    2,5M   63G    1%
> > /dev/shmtmpfs                           5,0M    4,7M  324K   94%
> > /run/lock   <--- samba is filling
> 
> I guess it's pointless to reply, since seemengly Daniel is using
> thismailing list as a write-only media.  But for others it might be
> helpful.
> Here, depending on the load of servers, I see /run/samba directory
> sizes(here it is configured to use /run/samba instead of /run/lock)
> rangingfrom 8M to 50M.  None of servers fits into 5M.
Thanks so much, that saved me a lot of writing about how you might
debug it, assuming a reasonable sized partition.  
That is a really strange configuration, with TB of disk available
elsewhere!
Andrew, 

-- 
Andrew Bartlett (he/him)       https://samba.org/~abartlet/Samba Team Member
(since 2001) https://samba.orgSamba Team Lead               
https://catalyst.net.nz/services/sambaCatalyst.Net Ltd
Proudly developing Samba for Catalyst.Net Ltd - a Catalyst IT group
company
Samba Development and Support: https://catalyst.net.nz/services/samba
Catalyst IT - Expert Open Source Solutions

Hello Andrew,

 

so I did  ?lock directory = /var/run/samba? in my smb.conf  and the things run
as it should be.

Thank You

 

Daniel

 

Von: Andrew Bartlett [mailto:abartlet at samba.org] 
Gesendet: Dienstag, 12. September 2023 09:14
An: Michael Tokarev <mjt at tls.msk.ru>; Daniel M?ller <mueller at
tropenklinik.de>; samba samba <samba at lists.samba.org>
Betreff: Re: [Samba] WG: Update to samba 4.19 Aduc no longer working No login

 

On Tue, 2023-09-12 at 10:08 +0300, Michael Tokarev via samba wrote:

12.09.2023 09:56, Daniel M?ller via samba:

This is realy urgent. Wachting the behaviour of samba 4.19. It is filling  tmpfs
/run/lock/samba until 100%:
Dateisystem                    Gr??e Benutzt Verf. Verw% Eingeh?ngt auf
udev                             63G       0   63G    0% /dev
tmpfs                            13G    2,4M   13G    1% /run
/dev/mapper/dommaster--vg-root  3,6T     17G  3,4T    1% /
tmpfs                            63G    2,5M   63G    1% /dev/shm
tmpfs                           5,0M    4,7M  324K   94% /run/lock   <---
samba is filling

 
I guess it's pointless to reply, since seemengly Daniel is using this
mailing list as a write-only media.  But for others it might be helpful.
 
Here, depending on the load of servers, I see /run/samba directory sizes
(here it is configured to use /run/samba instead of /run/lock) ranging
from 8M to 50M.  None of servers fits into 5M.

 
Thanks so much, that saved me a lot of writing about how you might debug it,
assuming a reasonable sized partition.
 
That is a really strange configuration, with TB of disk available elsewhere!
 
Andrew, 
 
-- 

Andrew Bartlett (he/him)       https://samba.org/~abartlet/

Samba Team Member (since 2001) https://samba.org

Samba Team Lead                https://catalyst.net.nz/services/samba

Catalyst.Net Ltd

 

Proudly developing Samba for Catalyst.Net Ltd - a Catalyst IT group company

 

Samba Development and Support: https://catalyst.net.nz/services/samba

 

Catalyst IT - Expert Open Source Solutions

12.09.2023 10:14, Andrew Bartlett via samba wrote:
>> 12.09.2023 09:56, Daniel M?ller via samba:
>>> /dev/shmtmpfs                           5,0M    4,7M  324K   94%
>>> /run/lock   <--- samba is filling
> That is a really strange configuration, with TB of disk available
> elsewhere!
It actually is not.  All these are tmpfs filesystems, ie, something which
is entirely in RAM.  Which fits exactly for this usage.

It is also quite common to have /run/lock separate from /run, and to have
5M of space in /run/lock.  This is because /run/lock is really for locking
purposes only, to have things like zero-length lock files (which are fcntl-
locked by some process) to prevent concurrent access to some subsystem, or
maybe pid files, or somesuch.  This stuff is really small and 5M is more
than adequate for this.

However, samba lock directory not only have this sort of lock files, but
it also contains database of files open by remote clients.  This one is
significantly larger, and really should not be put to /run/lock, even if
both are about "locking".  The difference here is, basically,
/run/lock
is meant for "subsystem" or "service" locking, and
there's just a small
amount of services on the system.  But samba locking is a client thing
which can be huge depending on server usage.

Also, besides the locking, samba keeps some other data in this directory,
like f.e. gencache.tdb.  Still, locking.tdb is the largest file in there,
it seems like.

This is exactly why I configure samba on debian to use /run/samba for
all this stuff instead of /run/lock.

Using /var/run for this isn't a good idea, since this all is a run-time
stuff which should be removed at exit/reboot, and things like that are
best to be kept in ram, - fast access, significantly less hdd wear etc.

Generally, samba does place its files a bit arbitrary and unthinkfully.
For example, in debian I have a patch which move socket directory (which
is definitely a runtime thing, with sockets to communicate with running
processes) to lock directory instead of having them in /var/lib/samba/ (!!)
where they don't fit at all.

/mjt