similar to: Samba + Windos XP/2k + Netbench Problem

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:

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

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

-----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

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

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 updated Vredir.vxd file corrects a problem deleting files on Samba servers running on UNIX- based computers. This problem can cause local files to be deleted. (168936 bytes, published 07/16/97 ) http://www.microsoft.com/isapi/support/ps_sl.idc?purl=/windows/&pfx=w95&base=windowssupport&kbd=win95x&sl=q_misc95 Hope this helps, Alan

I am running Samba on a Red Hat 7.2 server. I shared a Epson Stylus C80 printer as the instructions collected in many How-To's teached me. The printer is working, but the print job stated from windows 98 clients takes to much time to get the server. The job is around 5 megabytes in size and takes 2 to 3 minutes to get the server. One file with same size takes 20 seconds to be copied from

Hi, we have a strange problem with a win 10 system. The windows system is using network shares exported from a linux system running samba 4.8. ~250 people are using the shares without any problem. This server is running automatically some mysql queries. The results of the queries are written to a file on the share. 1 or 2 times (from 10) this will fail. We only get an error like "file not

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

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

Hello I was wondering why there doesn't seem to a Windows version of Zaptel, making the Digium and its clones unavailable for a Windows PBX. Is the Zaptel/Zapata combo too *nix-centric? Thanks.

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

On 12 June 2017 at 18:54, Diana Picus <diana.picus at linaro.org> wrote: > 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. > > I did some more investigations on a machine