similar to: Samba 4 slower ?

Hi, I got problem while using smbtorture with the NBENCH test. The error happens on the "Mkdir" operation. I'm using the file "client.txt" from dbench-3.04. There are "Mkdir" operations, but in the file "torture.c", this operation is not handled. Few other operations are not handled. I did compare operations from run_netbench and those that are present

Hi Nagendra here I have existing a samba-3 installation which has a smb encrypt as mandatory i.e : smb encrypt* =* mandatory I am trying to connect to this machine's share with windows & I am getting the following error on the windows 8 client System error 5 has occurred. Access is denied. But I use the same client machine to access another windows-8 machine with SMB encryption I am

Dear Members, I have install samba 3.0.10 d # ./smbstatus Sessionid.tdb not initialised /usr/local/samba/var/locks/connections.tdb not initialised This is normal if an SMB client has never connected to your server. Failed to open byte range locking database ERROR: Failed to initialise locking database Can't initialise locking module - exiting # But the var/locks directory

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, 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

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

Hi all, I've started looking at the GlobalMerge pass, enabled by default on ARM and AArch64. I think we should reconsider that, at least for AArch64. As is, the pass just merges all globals together, in groups of 4KB (AArch64, 128B on ARM). At the time it was enabled, the general thinking was "it's almost free, it doesn't affect performance much, we might as well use it".

Hi All, Now per my reading's to run the smbtorture test tool required in the dbench config.txt file. Is this still ture? I am using distribution samba-3.0.27a. Results from initial run: host=10.60.100.131 share=moab2 user=engsmoke/admin1 myname=rh-scale-144 Did not find a test named 1 Running NBENCH 1 clients started ERROR: You are using a dbench 1 load file Throughput 0 MB/sec

-----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

Hello, I've written a BSD application that has to do many parallel CIFS authentications, SID to name, and name to SID operations. It was written using smbclient application as an example and links against libsmb. The problem is that it doesn't seem possible to send a large number of parallel operations to the domain controller using the samba libraries, unless I fork a lot of processes,

Andy and I briefly discussed this the other day, we have not yet got chance to list a detailed pass order for the pre- and post- IPO scalar optimizations. This is wish-list in our mind: pre-IPO: based on the ordering he propose, get rid of the inlining (or just inline tiny func), get rid of all loop xforms... post-IPO: get rid of inlining, or maybe we still need it, only

Summary ======= I'm planning on adjusting SimplifyCFG so that it doesn't turn two-entry phi nodes into selects until later in the pass pipeline, to give passes which can understand phis but not selects more opportunity to optimize. The thing I'm trying to do which made me think of doing this is described below, but from the benchmarking I've done it looks like this is overall 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

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 If I use the smbtorture available at ftp://ftp.samba.org/pub/tridge/dbench, I get the following options: tests are: FDPASS LOCK1 LOCK2 LOCK3 UNLINK BROWSE ATTR TRANS2 MAXFID TORTURE RANDOMIPC NBW95 NBWNT default test is ALL But the smbtorture compiled with Gentoo's 3.0.2a gives me tests are: FDPASS LOCK1 LOCK2 LOCK3 LOCK4 LOCK5 LOCK6 LOCK7

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 all, We have 4 outstanding tests on clang-mergefunc-x86_64-freeBSD9.2 builder. I have introduced issues for them in bugzilla: http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=18089 http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=18056 Since we have opened issues for these tests, can we add them to ignore-list for this builder? It allows faster catch and fix other failures (if we get them). I also wandering, may be