similar to: [Announce] Samba 4.5.0rc1 Available for Download

Release Announcements ===================== This is the second release candidate of Samba 4.5. This is *not* intended for production environments and is designed for testing purposes only. Please report any defects via the Samba bug reporting system at https://bugzilla.samba.org/. Samba 4.5 will be the next version of the Samba suite. UPGRADING ========= NTLMv1 authentication disabled by

Release Announcements ===================== This is the second release candidate of Samba 4.5. This is *not* intended for production environments and is designed for testing purposes only. Please report any defects via the Samba bug reporting system at https://bugzilla.samba.org/. Samba 4.5 will be the next version of the Samba suite. UPGRADING ========= NTLMv1 authentication disabled by

Release Announcements ===================== This is the third release candidate of Samba 4.5. This is *not* intended for production environments and is designed for testing purposes only. Please report any defects via the Samba bug reporting system at https://bugzilla.samba.org/. Samba 4.5 will be the next version of the Samba suite. UPGRADING ========= NTLMv1 authentication disabled by

Release Announcements ===================== This is the third release candidate of Samba 4.5. This is *not* intended for production environments and is designed for testing purposes only. Please report any defects via the Samba bug reporting system at https://bugzilla.samba.org/. Samba 4.5 will be the next version of the Samba suite. UPGRADING ========= NTLMv1 authentication disabled by

Does this push 4.2.x to discontinued? On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Stefan Metzmacher <metze at samba.org> wrote: > ====================================================== > "It does not matter how slowly you go > as long as you do not stop." > > Confucius >

====================================================== "It does not matter how slowly you go as long as you do not stop." Confucius ====================================================== Release Announcements --------------------- This is the first stable release of the Samba 4.5 release series. UPGRADING ========= NTLMv1

====================================================== "It does not matter how slowly you go as long as you do not stop." Confucius ====================================================== Release Announcements --------------------- This is the first stable release of the Samba 4.5 release series. UPGRADING ========= NTLMv1

======================================================== "The art of medicine consists in amusing the patient while nature cures the disease." Voltaire ======================================================== Release Announcements --------------------- This is the latest stable release of the Samba 4.8 release series. Please note that this will very likely be the last

======================================================== "The art of medicine consists in amusing the patient while nature cures the disease." Voltaire ======================================================== Release Announcements --------------------- This is the latest stable release of the Samba 4.8 release series. Please note that this will very likely be the last

Hi, We are using CTDB version 1.0.77 and yesterday we saw an instance of node running into issues and banning itself to recover (as listed below): node1: 2009/07/29 23:23:37.748251 [22371]: Banning node 0 for 300 seconds 2009/07/29 23:23:37.748263 [22371]: self ban - lowering our election priority 2009/07/29 23:23:37.748503 [22275]: This node has been banned - forcing freeze and recovery Now

All, I have a 3 node CTDB cluster which serves 4 'public addresses'. /etc/ctdb/public_addresses file is node specific and present in the above path in participating nodes. All the nodes run RHEL 6.2. Other ctdb config files such as "nodes" and "public_addresses" are placed on a shared filesystem mounted on a known location (say, /gluster/lock) On starting CTDB

Hi 2 node drbd cluster with ocfs2. both nodes: openSUSE 4.1.9 with drbd 8.4 and ctdbd 2.3 All seems OK with ctdb: n1: ctdb status Number of nodes:2 pnn:0 192.168.0.10 OK (THIS NODE) pnn:1 192.168.0.11 OK Generation:1187222392 Size:2 hash:0 lmaster:0 hash:1 lmaster:1 Recovery mode:NORMAL (0) Recovery master:0 n2: ctdb status Number of nodes:2 pnn:0 192.168.0.10 OK pnn:1 192.168.0.11

On 03/07/16 21:47, Volker Lendecke wrote: > On Sun, Jul 03, 2016 at 08:42:36PM +0100, Alex Crow wrote: >> I've only put the "private dir" onto MooseFS, as instructed in the CTDB >> docs. > Can you quote these docs, so that we can correct them? > >> So, in that case, I'm assuming from your comments that it is no worry >> that the mmap test does not

Hello, I've got a two node CTDB/Samba cluster that I'm having trouble with trying to add back a node after having to do an OS reload on it. The servers are running CTDB 2.5.1 and Samba 4.1.4 on AIX 7.1 TL2. The Samba CTDB databases and Samba service work fine from the node that was not reloaded. The rebuilt node is failing to re-add itself to the cluster. I'm looking for

Hi, I?ve setup a simple ctdb cluster. Actually copied the config file from an existing system. Thats what happens: Node 1, alone Number of nodes:2 pnn:0 10.0.0.1 OK (THIS NODE) pnn:1 10.0.0.2 DISCONNECTED|UNHEALTHY|INACTIVE Generation:1369816268 Size:1 hash:0 lmaster:0 Recovery mode:NORMAL (0) Recovery master:0 Node1, after start of ctdb on Node 2 Number of nodes:2 pnn:0

greetings, trying to follow tridge's failover process at http://samba.org/~tridge/ctdb_movies/node_disable.html I encounter this error. oss02:~ # smbstatus -np Processing section "[homes]" Processing section "[profiles]" Processing section "[users]" Processing section "[groups]" Processing section "[local]" Processing section

hi everyone any experience with ctdb? I'm setting up a simple cluster, only ldap backend instead of tdb2. One (of the two) server fails this way: 50.samba: ERROR: smb.conf cache create failed $ ctdb status Number of nodes:2 pnn:0 10.5.6.32 OK pnn:1 10.5.6.49 UNHEALTHY (THIS NODE) Generation:323266562 Size:2 hash:0 lmaster:0 hash:1 lmaster:1 Recovery mode:NORMAL (0) Recovery

Thanks Martin! We are using the ctdb 4.6.10. Are you able to recreate this every time? Sometimes? Rarely? Rarely. Note that you're referring to nodes 1, 2, 3 while CTDB numbers the nodes 0, 1, 2. In fact, the situation is a little more confused than this: This is my wrong. The CTDB numbers the nodes is 0,1,2. # ctdb status Number of nodes:3 pnn:0 10.231.8.70 OK pnn:1 10.231.8.68 OK

Thanks Martin! We are using the ctdb 4.6.10. Are you able to recreate this every time? Sometimes? Rarely? Rarely. Note that you&apos;re referring to nodes 1, 2, 3 while CTDB numbers the nodes 0, 1, 2. In fact, the situation is a little more confused than this: This is my wrong. The CTDB numbers the nodes is 0,1,2. # ctdb status Number of nodes:3 pnn:0 10.231.8.67 OK pnn:1 10.231.8.65 OK

On 09/11/16 16:05, lejeczek via samba wrote: > hi everyone > > an attempt to set up a cluster, I'm reading around and see > some howto writers would say to put "private dir on the FS > cluster" - one question I have: is this correct? necessary? > > I have partial success, I get: > > $ ctdb status > Number of nodes:2 > pnn:0 10.5.6.32 OK >