samba - Nov 2024 - Slow reply to "smbclient -NL localhost" : strace

On 05/11/2024 18:16, Michael Tokarev wrote:
> If smbclient were just to run usleep() function, it will
> show exactly the same behavior.
>
> What's happening here, most likely, is that smbclient is
> making some network calls and is waiting for the reply.
>
> It might be a DNS problem or samba (configuration) problem,
> depending on where and what it is waiting for.
>
> And yes, this will be visible in the strace output.
>
>> FWIW, there's no delay after I run it once? but only for a couple
of
>> minutes.
>
> This suggests it might be a name resolution issue. 
What files could help find the source of the problem?

Here's the smb.conf:
==========[global]
workgroup = WORKGROUP
netbios name = SHEEVAPLUG

security = user
;added, but makes no difference
server role = standalone server

map to guest = Bad User
guest account = www-data

log level = 2

disable netbios = yes
client min protocol = SMB2_02
server min protocol = SMB2_02
smb ports = 445

printcap name = /dev/null
load printers = no
printing = bsd

[nginx]
path = /usr/share/nginx
;comment = No need for Unix/Samba passwords
guest ok = yes
writeable=yes
browseable=yes
create mode = 0644

[sdcard]
path = /mnt/sdcard
guest ok = yes
writeable=yes
browseable=yes
;don't work with vfat fs
;create mode = 0644 ; still -rw-r-xr-x
===========

On 06/11/2024 06:59, Gilles via samba wrote:
> What files could help find the source of the problem?
FWIW, it makes no difference:

~# smbclient -NL 127.0.0.1

06.11.2024 08:59, Gilles via samba wrote:
>>> FWIW, there's no delay after I run it once? but only for a
couple of minutes.
>>
>> This suggests it might be a name resolution issue. 
> 
> What files could help find the source of the problem?
That's a strange question. Without understanding what the
actual problem is, it's hardly possible to point to the
solution.

Take a closer look at strace.  You've already noticed
the recv() call takes a noticeable time, - find all of
them.

BTW, in your strace output you omitted some important
pieces, for example, it isn't visible what FD#5 corresponds
to, since you omitted its creation/open.

The prob might not be the (host) name resolution of smbclient,
but on the receiving side too. Or might be something else
entirely.


/mjt