similar to: Netbench 6.0/Windows 2000 and samba

I have installed the latest alpha of samba (1.9.18alpha4) with the intent of testing against the Ziff-Davis benchmark NetBench. The compile and install went OK, and I can see the server in the browser and connect to the public share I created (logins work OK). Running the tests in DIAGNOSIS.txt produces no errors also. I can also install netbench and start up the controller from the binary

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

Greetings- We use smbclient -M to send a Message of the Day to clients every once in a while. The clients are NT4 (SP3), and the server is Samba 1.9.19-prealpha. However, the same problem appears with version 2.0.0. The issue is: once the file to be sent exceeds approximately 675 bytes (smbclient reports sending 975 bytes, presumably including some overhead), the message turns up blank on the

-----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

-----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

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

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

I've compiled and installed Samba version 2.0.0-prealpha (15) on an IRIX 6.2 box without problem. I created an account using 'smbpasswd -a -m' and see it in the private/smbpasswd file. I can see the server 'ackowledging' the NT 4.0 workstation client to some extent in the log files but still see "The machine account for this computer either does not exist or is not

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

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 >

Hi, I just installed Version 2.0.0-prealpha on a Solaris 2.5.1 machine. We are exporting one filesystem to the PC's. I can connect from my Win95 PC without a problem and I see all the files on the shared drive. If I bring up Windows explore and double click on a text file I can see the file without a problem. I then close the file and go to the unix box and change the text file. If I then

The Samba Team is pleased to announce a new major release of Samba, Samba 2.2.0. Samba 2.2.0 is available in source form from samba.org and all of our mirror sites. Binary packages will be available shortly for many popular platforms. Please check the main Web site or email announcements for details. If you have problems, or think you have found a bug please email a report to :

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 (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... I have exactly the same problem with lsarpcd giving the error "ERROR: setgroups call failed!". Anyone know of a fix?? MWP > Hello > > I was just installing the new TNG 1.0.5 and after i installed and cleaned the > logs i started the dameons and was unable to access the shares on win98. The > computer showed up in Network Neighborhood but i would get a \\comp03

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

Yes, I get more than 30MB/s performance. The benchmark I use (NetBench) is essentially CPU bound, such that a faster processor = faster performance. With a very fast hardware config (dual 3.2GHz processors), I've been able to hit around 100MB/s. Changing the RAM or other attributes does not buy me much, it seems that processor power is the bottleneck (at least in my case). When doing your