similar to: new oplocks

I thought I had things figured out, but guess not. I have multi-user Quickbooks databases that functioned fine on a Novell server but are behaving badly on a Samba share. I have created a separate share for the Quickbook databases, users are running Win XP Pro, latest patches, and the Quickbooks application installed on the desktop. It is a multiuser version. Server is RedHat ES 3, Samba

We have a lot of [2006/01/04 18:44:40, 0] smbd/open.c:open_file_ntcreate(1355) Trying to delay for oplocks twice in the logs. Do they harm in general? And only in one single case I got this, don't know if I ever will get it reproduced, so maybe not related and happened by accident: Samba version 3.0.21a PID Username Group Machine

Hi all, I use samba 2.2.2 on AIX 4.3.2 (1500 NT4 sp6a / w2k sp2 workstation). since i had updated from 2.0.7 to 2.2.2 the CPU load will very fast go to 100% an d teh memory use of a smbd process will grow up to 100 MB. In teh log-files are many errors like that: PANIC: open_mode_check: Existant process 22700 left active oplock smbd/open.c:open_mode_check(555) open_mode_check: exlusive oplock

On Tue, Jan 24, 2023 at 08:29:17PM +0300, Michael Tokarev via samba wrote: >24.01.2023 20:22, Ralph Boehme via samba wrote: >>What Samba version is this? This: >> >>>LEASE() >> >>... looks broken: the handle oplock/lease state claims to be a >>lease, which means the client didn't request an oplock but a lease >>which should not have happened in

Dear all, We have samba-3.0.11 on freebsd 5.4 as file/print server it works perfect, but if two users open the same file together the second still can write to the file it cannot be allowed in you situation. But the other server with freebsd 4.11 doesn't have this problem perfectly do write lock on open file, so may be it's freebsd 5.x problem? I can't find what's wrong,

I am using expression() to incorporate text into graphics. To create a superscript, I use the '^' character. Can someone please tell me the character to use to create a subscript? Thank you ----------------------------------------------------- Christine Donnelly Statistical Consulting Unit The Graduate School John Dedman Mathematical Sciences Building (Bldg 27) Australian National

Hi all, I've posted a similar message a few weeks ago. I had the 'oplock' problem. I run a linux server with samba (specification below). I get a reply who told me to disable kernel oplocks and oplocks. I did exactly what he told me to do. I hoped it worked... but it did not... From there one i started reading in the archives and followed the 'lock' discussions in this list.

Hi, I' m experiencing many problems with oplocks break failure and Error: no route to host.essentialy onto \profiles dir and \netlogon dir. So My clients cannot update many files on the SAMBA/PDC and cannot read the NTconfig.pol file to update their policies. I have many PC that are old computers with Win2k and have an Antivirus and are slower machines ... This problem less occurs on newer

I have been searching for info on this and haven't found an authoritative answer. From what I have read, oplocks are good because they increase connection speeds, but they are bad because they don't really work, but they actually do work, but they only work in some cases, etc etc. so, here's my problem and my question together: I get tons of these messages every day (over a thousand a

I get the following log messages using rsync 2.5.1 compiled on Solaris 8 when using the "hosts allow" option in rsyncd.conf: 2002/01/23 12:09:51 [28276] rsync: reverse name lookup mismatch on fd0 - spoofed address? 2002/01/23 12:10:18 [28276] rsync: connection unexpectedly closed (16 bytes read so far) Resolv.conf/DNS are configured and working properly with both A and PTR records

In summary we have no less than six patches required to support Win64 SEH MinGW. The first five could be committed after review and LGTM but the last one also requires Ray Donnelly approval. Please comment in the Phabricator so the comments would be kept in context. 'unreachable' trap http://reviews.llvm.org/D3417 Win64 SEH (LLVM) http://reviews.llvm.org/D3418 Win64 SEH (clang)

Since switching from Samba 2.2.3a-6 on Debian stable to 3.0.2a packages from the samba.org server (system is Debian stable too) we've had extreme problems with Office documents. Samba acts as a PDC and the user log onto it. The LDAP Authentication works great. Our clients are all Windows 2000 and Office 2000. When opening documents word (excel) sometimes just hangs (for 30 seconds until

Robert Dal Santo wrote: > Is there any work underway to get Samba to support OPLOCKS? I know > they are difficult to implement but I'm faced with a decisions now to buy an > NT box (Ugh!) or do a lot of messing around to get this application > to perform decently. The application in questions takes around 5 > hours to do a taks without OPLOCKS and around an hour to do the

Hi there, Can somebody please explain to me why Samba 3 requires 'oplocks = no' on shares for programs like Quickbooks to operate properly with multiple users, where Samba 2 didn't? Without this option, Quickbooks will complain about file corruption when a second user tries to open a file. This option, however, makes the particular share that the option is present in _very_ slow

Dear friends, is there anybody who can help us, I've the same problem with the Kickoff Time. I also found no possibility to change it... Heinz -------- Original-Nachricht -------- Betreff: [Samba] Kickoff time expired, how to change? Datum: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 10:35:32 -0700 Von: Tim Donnelly <tim@coalliance.org> An: <samba@lists.samba.org> I am attempting to move my

I'm using samba version 2.2.1a on a linux RH7.2 kernel 2.4.7-10. I'm having a lot of oplock problems, specially when using office applications like word. I would like to know: 1. what is the recommended configuration in version 2.2.1a (oplocks = yes/no , level2 oplocks = yes/no , kernel oplocks = yes/no) 2. what is considered to be a stable version for oplocks usage Thanks, Nir

Hello! When I'm set oplocks to Yes I'm getting "Oplock break failed for file %s" and files (.doc .xls and .jpg|png etc) take forever to load When I set oplocks to No files opening o.k. but MS Word is saying that they are Read Only. Permissions are 100% fine. The client is Windows 7 Enterprise. Please help.... this is so important to me :( Was it resolved in SAMBA

Hello, I am having (weird) issues with XFS, in that open(...) on certain files takes 45 seconds to return. After the file has been opened, the next file in the same directory takes 45 seconds. If the file was recently opened it returns immediately. I have raised this on several mailing lists, see: <http://lists.luv.asn.au/wws/arc/luv-main/2008-06/msg00143.html>

To whom it may concern, Would appreciate it if anyone knows how we might easily exclude NFS mount points within a file system from being rsync'd? Regards, Craig Donnelly Andel Consulting 10 Fenchurch Avenue London EC3M 5BN Tel: 0207 6655055 Fax: 0207 6655060

Hi, I googled around and the general wisdom seems to be that oplocks provide a performance gain if files are accessed by a single client at a time (that is, if the oplock does not break). What I can't figure out is what test can show this performance gain. I mean, theoretically, document-editing applications (Word,excel) save and load whole files and hence do not benefit from oplocks.