similar to: Huge number of small files performance regression from 3.5.16 to 4.6.5 with identical smb.conf

Hello Jeremy, thanks a million for your help and interest in tracking this down! :-) Am 13.06.2017 um 18:36 schrieb Jeremy Allison: > Can you get comparitive wireshark traces for the two cases ? > > That would help discover what the bottleneck is. I am not at all a network guy, but I hope that - maybe with a little more help from your part once I have tried to do so in practice - I

On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 12:09:41PM +0200, awl1 via samba wrote: > Hello Samba experts, > > I have just successfully replaced the old default Thecus Samba > version 3.5.16 on my Thecus NAS (32-bit Intel Atom, 3 GB RAM, i686 > Thecus kernel 2.6.33) by a current Samba 4.6.5 build that I have > cross-compiled myself from scratch. > > Note that so far, I am using the unchanged

Hello again, Jeremy and other Samba experts, I'm sorry to be such a pain in your neck(s), but I still need your help in looking for help trying to find out why SMB2/3.1.1 in Samba 4.6.5 performs so much worse than SMB/1.5 in Samba 3.6.15 in scenarios with a huge number of small files. As requested by Jeremy, I have done wireshark "pcapng" captures of the four scenarios as

Hello again, Jeremy, first of all, I am terribly sorry for my late reply. I tried to send my posting many times, but my mail has always been silently discarded by the Samba mail servers due to my main mail provider (GMX - a very large German mail provider with millions of customers) having been blacklisted by SORBS. For the time being, SORBS is still unwilling to delist them for unknown

Andreas, A few thoughts regarding your system 1) If it's a home system and you're specifically concerned about mitigating CVE 2017-7494, (a) verify that your share isn't mounted 'noexec' - if it's mounted this way then you're safe (b) if not (a), then add the [global] parameter "nt pipe support = no". This will break functionality that relies on support for

On Thu, 2017-06-08 at 11:28 +0200, awl1 via samba wrote: > Hello Andrew, > > and many thanks for your fast reply! :-) > > Am 08.06.2017 um 11:05 schrieb Andrew Bartlett: > > I think the key to avoiding the issue is that you have listed rpc > > modules which are not modules. The only rpc server module is > > rpc_mdssvc_module. > > Ah, OK, I see - so I

Hello Andrew, hello Samba experts, first of all, good news: So I have indeed managed to compile a set co cross-compiled binaries and installed them successfully onto my NAS. Many thanks for your help in getting there! I have now only used --bundled-libraries=ALL \ and left "--with-static-modules" unset (default). From cursorily testing so far, indeed everything

Hello Andrew, many thanks for joining this discussion! :-) Am 18.08.2017 um 21:46 schrieb Andrew Bartlett: > I do realise you are in between a rock and a hard place. You have > identified an interesting issue, triggered by a massive protocol change > (so not able to be bisected down to a regression) that requires > significant work to understand and may or not be possible to

Hello Samba experts, due to the "SambaCry" issue (CVE-2017-7494), I am trying to update the Samba server installation on my Thecus NAS (dating back to 2011) from version 3.5.16 to the current 4.6.4. So far, I have successfully * created a cross-compiling toolchain for the NAS (i686-nptl-linux-gnu) based on gcc-5.2 * compiled Python and Samba library dependencies for my

Hi again, Jeremy, and hi to all commercial customers of Samba supporting companies on this list, ;-) Am 18.08.2017 um 20:18 schrieb Jeremy Allison: > What I mean is what you're asking is interesting, and I might get time > to look at this, but I can't give any guarentees. Work priorities and > any security issues always have to come first. If people *need* a > guaranteed

On Thu, 2017-06-08 at 10:09 +0200, awl1 via samba wrote: > Hello again, Samba experts, > > sorry for being such a pain in your necks, but I really need to get a > recent Samba version to compile, and it looks like I definitely need > your help with this. > > In the meantime, I have found that the huge number of "conflicting > types" errors for rpc_*_init(...)

Hi. Ok - I took a shortcut: I finally found a 4.6.5 deb package for Ubuntu: https://launchpad.net/~rewi/+archive/ubuntu/samba I know that this package is just as fresh as bread from the oven, and that the packager states "not for production". Anyway, it installs without make, make install and configure, and there is no issues with paths. Wonderful :-) I can even install a printer on

I ran into a problem that I couldn't resolve straight away, but would like to solve for sometime in the future. We have a Thecus storage server (similar to a Buffalo TeraByte, if that helps?) that has a Mac filesystem on it. The mother board was failing, but the drives are still OK. A new box has been added, so the urgency is sort of gone. I was going to try and back up the data to a new

Hello again, Jeremy (and hello, fellow Samba experts - maybe someone of you can comment on this, too!?), please accept my apologies in case you are on vacation - otherwise in case you are still terribly busy, please at least reply very shortly stating when you will finally have some time to look into this issue and my findings... Sorry to still be such a pain in your neck(s), but another two

Hello Andrew, and many thanks for your fast reply! :-) Am 08.06.2017 um 11:05 schrieb Andrew Bartlett: > I think the key to avoiding the issue is that you have listed rpc > modules which are not modules. The only rpc server module is > rpc_mdssvc_module. Ah, OK, I see - so I seem to have been wrong when assuming that I could take the output of Samba 3.5.16 "smbd -b" command

Hi, I'm looking at using Linux as a NAS / SAN device, and would like some input from other's who have done this before? How would it compare to commercial SAN devices, Thecus N8800SAS (http://www.thecus.com/products_over.php?cid=11&pid=177&set_language=english) or something similar to these? I would probably use hardware RAID 10, and could go with either SAS / SATA, and then

Hey, The recent discussion on NAS/SAN and the Thecus N8800 got me to thinking. Bit of background. I have an old Dual Athlon MP2800+ that I'm using for a home web/file server. It runs fine but between the noise of the various fans and it's location in the living room, I've been asked by my spouse to find a replacement for it that's smaller & quieter. Looking at the Thecus, and

I have a Thecus NAS, which seems to be a samba server internally # smbclient -L thecus : Domain=[THECUS] OS=[Unix] Server=[Samba 3.0.14a] My Workstation (Mandrake 10.1): # uname -r 2.6.11-6mdk # rpm -qa |grep samba samba-server-3.0.13-2mdk samba-swat-3.0.13-2mdk samba-common-3.0.13-2mdk samba-client-3.0.13-2mdk The problem: when I 'mount -t smbfs' one of the folders of the thecus and

Hi Bruce Thank you very much for reaching out. This is likely to be a short discussion due to me potentially learning that my infrastructure possibly has shortfalls that I did not appreciate until just recently. What I was hoping to do is deploy Windows from a Thecus branded NAS. Natively the NAS does not support PXE, but with community created mods it is achievable. So with this mod

Hello again, Samba experts, sorry for being such a pain in your necks, but I really need to get a recent Samba version to compile, and it looks like I definitely need your help with this. In the meantime, I have found that the huge number of "conflicting types" errors for rpc_*_init(...) is due to the fact that the Samba 4.6.4 codebase seems to have for all RPC modules: NTSTATUS