similar to: Netbench running on Samba 1.9.18alpha4

This (see below) is what I found in the Samba Introduction Document. Can anyone tell me where I can find the Ziff-Davis benchmark tests? Thanks a lot, Werner Maes KULeuven "The Present Samba 2.0 was released in January 1999. One of the most significant and cool features of the 2.0 release was improved speed. Ziff-Davis Publishing used their Netbench software to benchmark Samba 2.0 on

Hi All, I'm running netbench against our samba based filer and having I believe a controller problem. When I configure the test to run multiple engines per client (about 5 in my case) and about 20 clients so all together I have 100 engines, the controller crashes. My clients are a mix of NT4, winxp and win2000 systems. If I run the controller on windows 2003, the controller simply

Hi all, there is a problem with the 'Default: nt smb support = yes' option in smb.conf for at least Samba 2.2.3a and 2.2.4 (on FreeBSD 4.5-STABLE) when using Netbench 7.0.2 on WXP or W2k clients. If the client is set to run 2+ Netbench engines (to simulate 2+ real clients) and 'nt smb support = yes', all but one engine fail pretty quickly, usually during a movefile oder

Has anyone gotten Netbench 6.0 running on Windows 2000 clients to work under samba? I'm running Samba 2.1.0-prealpha on linux with Windows 2000 professional clients. When I try to run it, it initializes successfully but when it starts to execute a test I get the error "Mix lock of handle 6 for length 1 at offset 2147483538 Failed". I'd appreciate any help. Nothing peculiar

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I'm running some netbench tests, and I have some questions I'd like to ask. First, what is the difference between the dm.tst and ent_dm.tst NetBench suites? Second, what results have people been getting with Samba 3.0.0? I'm seeing a peak at 340.00 for ent_dm.tst and 101.00 for dm.tst on a P4 system with 512 MB RAM. Any information

The Samba Team have just released a new alpha version of Samba - 1.9.17alpha5. It is our hope that this will be the last version of the 1.9.17 alpha series before the full 1.9.17 release. The new release is available from the URL: ftp://samba.anu.edu.au/pub/samba/alpha/samba-1.9.17alpha5.tar.gz and is in the form of a gzip'ed tar file. Here is the WHATSNEW.txt from the release. Regards,

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I was running a netbench performance test against Samba 3.0.11, and the test has not been able to complete fully. The samba logs contain lines such as this: [2005/02/28 11:35:23, 1] smbd/service.c:make_connection_snum(645) ~ slave16 (192.168.133.116) connect to service netbench initially as user BENCHLAB+slave16 (uid=10016, gid=10001) (pid

The Samba Team are pleased to announce Samba 1.9.17p5. This is a patch release designed to fix the few bugs that users had reported with our last stable release, 1.9.17p4. This release adds no new functionality, and if you were not impacted by the bugs then there is no need to upgrade from 1.9.17p4. Note however, that *all* users should upgrade to at least Samba version 1.9.17p2 due to a

Thanks Kristof. Sounds like we'll need to investigate though I'd say it is not blocking the switch. At this point I think everybody is on board to flip the switch. @Eric, how does that sound to you? Thanks, Q > Le 1 juin 2017 à 07:46, Kristof Beyls <Kristof.Beyls at arm.com> a écrit : > > >> On 31 May 2017, at 17:07, Quentin Colombet <qcolombet at

On Jul 27, 2013, at 5:47 PM, Shuxin Yang <shuxin.llvm at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, Sean: > > I'm sorry I lie. I didn't mean to lie. I did try to avoid making a *BIG* change > to the IPO pass-ordering for now. However, when I make a minor change to > populateLTOPassManager() by separating module-pass and non-module-passes, I > saw quite a few performance

Hi all, I added a buildbot [1] running the test-suite with -O0 -global-isel. It runs into the same 2 timeouts that I reported previously on this thread (paq8p and scimark2). It would be nice to make it green before flipping the switch. At the moment, it lives in an internal buildmaster that I've setup for this purpose. If we fix it and it proves to be stable for a week or two, I'll move

Samba Team Releases Samba 2.0 ============================= World's Fastest Windows Server Software ======================================= Canberra, Australia, January 1999. The Samba Team is pleased to announce Samba 2.0, a major new release of the award winning Open Source UNIX? file and print server suite for

from the man page. I've never tried veto oplocks. But it looks like something that might be useful... > veto oplock files (S) > > This parameter is only valid when the oplocks parameter is turned > on for a share. It allows the Samba administrator to selectively > turn off the granting of oplocks on selected files that match a >

The Samba Team are pleased to announce Samba 2.0 Beta2 This is the second of (hopefully) a short series of Beta releases of the 2.0 code and incorporates bug fixes and changes from feedback gained from the first beta. We are relasing these Betas to enable the Samba Team to gain wider testing of the new autoconf mechanism and fix any bugs before the first ship of the new stable version of Samba -

The Samba Team is pleased to announce Samba 2.0.1. This is the latest stable release of Samba. This is the version that all production Samba servers should be running for all current bug-fixes. Due to a couple of smbd crash bugs that were found in Samba 2.0.0 it is recommened all sites using Samba 2.0.0 upgrade to this release. It may be fetched via ftp from : ftp://<samba.org mirror

The Samba Team are pleased to announce Samba 2.0 Beta3 This is the third of (hopefully) a short series of Beta releases of the 2.0 code and incorporates bug fixes and changes from feedback gained from the first two betas. We are relasing these Betas to enable the Samba Team to gain wider testing of the new autoconf mechanism and fix any bugs before the first ship of the new stable version of

Hi all, while working with Netbench I've discovered that mangled directory names clash rather frequently with Samba 2.2.4: If I take an NT box, open the cmd prompt and make the following directories on a Samba share, client100 and client121, both mangle to CLIEN~GH. If I create directories client100 through client130 I see 11 clashes altogether: CLIEN~GH: client100 client121 CLIEN~MF:

Hi All, I have samba 3.6 and samba 4.2 running on 2 different freebsd machines. Both are virtual machines and have 1GB Ethernet and exact same configurations. Samba is joined to a 2K8 server(security = ADS). Both use a minimal similar smb.conf. Am using smbtorture bench.nbench from another freebsd machine. Samba 3.6 Throughput is at: 12.6165 MB/sec Samba 4.2 Throughput is at: 1.5359 MB/sec

This page (of a much longer story) might be interesting : http://www.pcmag.com/article/0,2997,s%253D1474%2526a%253D16554,00.asp Netbench results show Samba 2.2 faster than Windows 2000 in all cases on the same hardware (up to 1GHz processor with 512Mb ram). Regards, Jeremy Allison, Samba Team. PS. Yes I know, lies, damn lies & benchmarks etc.... :-). PPS. I wonder if any of the Samba

Hi, Sean: I'm sorry I lie. I didn't mean to lie. I did try to avoid making a *BIG* change to the IPO pass-ordering for now. However, when I make a minor change to populateLTOPassManager() by separating module-pass and non-module-passes, I saw quite a few performance difference, most of them are degradations. Attacking these degradations one by one in a piecemeal manner is wasting