similar to: windows 10 locking profile files

Hi folks, we are running a clustered Samba Fileserver using CTDB with two public IPs. We observed the following (mis) behavior: If user A with write permissions opens an excel file via public ip A and User B opens the same file via public ip B, both users get a Deny-Write lock on the same file and overwrite each others changes: 0:3693691 145522 DENY_WRITE 0x12019f RDWR

On 30/08/2019 02:52, David Walling via samba wrote: > We have been experiencing a debilitating 'bug' in samba where something is causing a flood of the messages seen below in smbstatus and the network drives ( in our case N: ) on all clients become unresponsive. In fact, the entire client becomes unresponsive, essentially making them unusable until samba is restarted. We first saw

We have been experiencing a debilitating 'bug' in samba where something is causing a flood of the messages seen below in smbstatus and the network drives ( in our case N: ) on all clients become unresponsive. In fact, the entire client becomes unresponsive, essentially making them unusable until samba is restarted. We first saw this and connected it to the following open bug in samba

I left in some of the parameters I've been testing commented out. Interestingly, we've noticed another client triggering the same type of symptoms every morning at around the same time. Those symptoms being a line 'lookup_name_smbconf for COMPUTERNAME$ failed' and a flood of failed connection attempts from the same client. The issue seemed to resolve itself after a few minutes

Just to update this, I'm going to upgrade to samba4 but it won't be for a few days yet, I'll keep this thread updated with what happens. On 10 Nov 2017 11:23, "L.P.H. van Belle via samba" <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > No, no idee, but really, upgrade to samba, best option, in my opinion. > If thats not possible, it happens.. > > A timeout option can

On Fri, 2024-04-05 at 19:13 +0100, Rowland Penny via samba wrote: > On Fri, 5 Apr 2024 19:58:33 +0200 > Pavel Lis? <pavel.lisy at gmail.com> wrote: > > > So, > > > > I've done some progress. > > > > I've made configuration according this article > > https://fedoramagazine.org/samba-as-ad-and-domain-controller/ > > they use sample

No, no idee, but really, upgrade to samba, best option, in my opinion. If thats not possible, it happens.. A timeout option can be set in krb5.conf for example : kdc_timeout = 5000 You have these for krb5.conf to try out also. the complete list. des-hmac-sha1 DES with HMAC/sha1 (weak) aes256-cts-hmac-sha1-96 aes256-cts AES-256 CTS mode with 96-bit SHA-1 HMAC

Well, it was quiet and stable for quite a while now .. thanks to all the devs ;-) This weekend I upgraded some Debian servers, from Debian 9.12 to 10.4 One of these is a Samba-4.10.15 DC and I didn't touch the samba config at all. Now smbstatus shows uids and gids in smbstatus output: # smbstatus Samba version 4.10.15-Debian PID Username Group Machine Protocol Version

On Fri, 5 Apr 2024 19:58:33 +0200 Pavel Lis? <pavel.lisy at gmail.com> wrote: > So, > > I've done some progress. > > I've made configuration according this article > https://fedoramagazine.org/samba-as-ad-and-domain-controller/ > they use sample kerberos config file from package samba-dc-provision: > > sudo cp /usr/share/samba/setup/krb5.conf

Thanks for your reply Rowland! 1. Here is my smb.conf --- # Global parameters [global] interfaces = eth0 workgroup = MYDOMAIN realm = mydomain.lan netbios name = PDC server string = PDC server role = active directory domain controller passdb backend = samba4 server services = s3fs, rpc, nbt, wrepl, ldap, cldap, kdc, drepl, winbind, ntp_signd, kcc, dnsupdate idmap_ldb:use rfc2307 =

hi all, I have a problem with some windows 7 pro (64) clients navigating on samba shares. The user wants to open a folder and then it takes a long time until it opens. Looking into the samba log of the PC it is filled with this entries (seems to check for every ldap user): [2013/03/18 10:10:54.224428, 2] passdb/pdb_ldap.c:572(init_sam_from_ldap) init_sam_from_ldap: Entry found for user:

So, I've done some progress. I've made configuration according this article https://fedoramagazine.org/samba-as-ad-and-domain-controller/ they use sample kerberos config file from package samba-dc-provision: sudo cp /usr/share/samba/setup/krb5.conf /etc/krb5.conf.d/samba-dc [libdefaults] default_realm = ${REALM} dns_lookup_realm = false dns_lookup_kdc = true [realms] ${REALM} = {

24.01.2023 20:09, Jeremy Allison via samba wrote: > On Tue, Jan 24, 2023 at 12:38:29PM +0300, Michael Tokarev via samba wrote: >> >> Here we've two files open, with kernel oplocks = yes (hence it is LEASE(), - >> before I enabled kernel oplocks, it was LEASE(RH) or LEASE(RWH)). > > Kernel oplocks do not support SMB2+ LEASES. So you're > just seeing old

On Fri, 05 Apr 2024 21:17:45 +0200 pavel.lisy at gmail.com wrote: > On Fri, 2024-04-05 at 19:13 +0100, Rowland Penny via samba wrote: > > On Fri, 5 Apr 2024 19:58:33 +0200 > > Pavel Lis? <pavel.lisy at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > So, > > > > > > I've done some progress. > > > > > > I've made configuration according

What for me looks a bit off. This is my output ( part of ) smbstatus -a on the AD-DC. PID Username Group Machine IP Protocol Version Encryption Signing 25843 ADDOM\member-vpn1$ ADDOM\domain computers 192.168.0.2 (ipv4:192.168.0.2:36860) SMB3_11 - AES-128-CMAC 34317 root ADDOM\domain users 192.168.0.5

Hello, I've recently set up Samba (4.12.3) on Arch Linux as the target for Time Machine backups for a couple of Macs. Shortly thereafter I started seeing OOMs whenever a backup would start. I stumbled upon disabling encryption on the server (i.e. changing "smb encrypt" from "required" to "off") to prevent this issue. After further digging, I'm able to

> > > Does the wireshark trace show the Windows client asking for and > getting a RWH lease under SMB2 ? If so, then there's no reason > it can't be caching the entire file locally. Seems strange > behaviour from the Windows redirector here. > I have uploaded the Linux packet capture here (14MB): https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B6UHr3GQEkQwWXJ1NjVwMkJXOEU Also,

16.03.2024 21:26, Ralph Boehme wrote: > On 3/16/24 18:18, Michael Tokarev wrote: >> Enabling strict renames does not change anything.? Yes it prevents from >> renaming a directory if a file is open inside.? But not renaming a plain >> file which is locked. > > oh, you mean just rename a plain file that is currently opened by some client? That is possible as long as all

Hi, we have a stange problem here since samba 4.12. Users on specific clients are not allowed to access a share after reboot of the client and in very rare cases suddenly during use. When we restart the smb service after the access denied message on the client for a share, the user is allowed to access the share. So there seems no problem with permissions. Are there any known reasons for

> The Linux client is asking for SMB1 and using 1MB write sizes. > > The Windows client is using SMB2 and *NOT ASKING FOR LEASES*. > > This is why the performance is terrible. Because the file > as no lease, the Windows redirector must pass every single > WriteFile() system call onto the wire, no matter how small > the size. > > If you can get the Windows SMB2 client