search for: 209749

...rmance bug with the way that their Windows SMB2/3 clients handle files with many entries, and this performance hit becomes excessively apparent once you try to copy a huge number of small files - please see the Wireshark SMBx packet analysis here: https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2017-July/209749.html https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2017-July/209750.html https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2017-July/209751.html for the details of how the Windows 10 client sends completely inefficient SMB2/3 commands in to to list the files in the current directory. I'm basically looking for c...

...ndows SMB2/3 clients handle files with many entries, and > this performance hit becomes excessively apparent once you try to > copy a huge number of small files - please see the Wireshark SMBx > packet analysis here: > > https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2017-July/209749.html > <https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2017-July/209749.html> > https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2017-July/209750.html > <https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2017-July/209750.html> > https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2017-July/209751.html &g...

...er stuff right now)." - I think have successfully tracked down the performance regression to at least one major root cause, which is a client-side issue in SMB2/SMB3 on the Windows platform - see my several posts on this list dated July 15th: https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2017-July/209749.html https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2017-July/209750.html https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2017-July/209751.html So basically at this point this analysis seems mostly done and I am "only" waiting for Jeremy and/or the Samba team to look into my assessment and provide your f...

...ay that their Windows SMB2/3 clients > handle files with many entries, and this performance hit becomes > excessively apparent once you try to copy a huge number of small files - > please see the Wireshark SMBx packet analysis here: > > https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2017-July/209749.html > https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2017-July/209750.html > https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2017-July/209751.html > > for the details of how the Windows 10 client sends completely inefficient > SMB2/3 commands in to to list the files in the current directory. I'm &...

...SMB2/SMB3 client that uses completely > inefficient SMB2_FIND_ID_BOTH_DIRECTORY_INFO requests in SMB2/3 as > opposed to efficient FIND_FIRST2 requests in SMB1: > > The main parts of my analysis of the issue are contained here: > > https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2017-July/209749.html > https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2017-July/209750.html > https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2017-July/209751.html > > Just citing key findings for your reference: > > In SMB1, the Windows client executes one FIND_FIRST2 Request for > each file to be copied (i.e...

...issue with Microsoft's SMB2/SMB3 client that uses completely inefficient SMB2_FIND_ID_BOTH_DIRECTORY_INFO requests in SMB2/3 as opposed to efficient FIND_FIRST2 requests in SMB1: The main parts of my analysis of the issue are contained here: https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2017-July/209749.html https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2017-July/209750.html https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2017-July/209751.html Just citing key findings for your reference: In SMB1, the Windows client executes one FIND_FIRST2 Request for each file to be copied (i.e. in my scenario, ~ 1000 requests)...

...quot; - I think have successfully > tracked down the performance regression to at least one major root cause, > which is a client-side issue in SMB2/SMB3 on the Windows platform - see my > several posts on this list dated July 15th: > > https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2017-July/209749.html > https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2017-July/209750.html > https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2017-July/209751.html > > So basically at this point this analysis seems mostly done and I am "only" > waiting for Jeremy and/or the Samba team to look into my assessm...

Hello everyone, in my setup I have two samba file server with clustered samba 4.6.7 and glusterfs 3.10. The server are connected via a 10 Gb network (one for clients and an extra network for gluster). When I am copying files from different server ( centos 7 1611, samba 4.4.4, connected with 10Gb) to the file servers with scp, the maximum speed is 70 MB/s (for small files this is decreasing).

Hi again, Jeremy, and hi to all commercial customers of Samba supporting companies on this list, ;-) Am 18.08.2017 um 20:18 schrieb Jeremy Allison: > What I mean is what you're asking is interesting, and I might get time > to look at this, but I can't give any guarentees. Work priorities and > any security issues always have to come first. If people *need* a > guaranteed

Hello again, Jeremy and other Samba experts, I'm sorry to be such a pain in your neck(s), but I still need your help in looking for help trying to find out why SMB2/3.1.1 in Samba 4.6.5 performs so much worse than SMB/1.5 in Samba 3.6.15 in scenarios with a huge number of small files. As requested by Jeremy, I have done wireshark "pcapng" captures of the four scenarios as