similar to: 32 seconds vs 72 minutes -- expected performance difference?

> > Unless you upload a network capture of you mounting and doing the ls -lR > on the client it's hard to say what really goes on. I understand you > might not want to make it public.. but if you do > This is the last thing I'll try after I've exhausted all the other options. How are you mounting your share (which mount options)? > Something weird is going on with

> > When you provide an exact vers= then no auto-negotiation happens (unless > you pass "vers=3" which essentially means 3.x: use 3.0 or above). You > either get the connection or mount fails. None the less, you can dump > the current SMB ressources managed by the kernel by looking at > /proc/fs/cifs/DebugData if your kernel is recent enough it should show > the SMB

Saurabh Nanda via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> writes: > Which implies that the server & client auto-negotiated a protocol version > greater than SMB2.1, right? However, to be sure, I manually specified vers= > in fstab, but something strange happened. While `man mount.cifs` claims > that the following are allowed -- 1.0, 2.0, 2.1, 3.0, 3.1.1 (or 3.11) -- > few of them

Saurabh Nanda via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> writes: > ## QUESTION > > I am sharing a 120GB folder with lots of files via Samba on a LAN (1Gbps > connection). > > 1) Doing an `ls -lR` on the server (on this folder) takes ~32 seconds, > compared with **72 minutes** on the client. Is this difference in > performance expected (due to network and protocol overhead)?

Saurabh Nanda <saurabhnanda at gmail.com> writes: > I found something interesting in /proc/fs/cifs/Stats. Notice the > "QueryDirectories > Failed" number. This keeps increasing as along as `ls > -lR` is running. That's interesting indeed. The verbose logs and network trace would tell us more. -- Aurélien Aptel / SUSE Labs Samba Team GPG: 1839 CB5F 9F5B FB9B AA97

> > I tried looking at the network capture using `tcpdump -A -X` but wasn't > able to understand anything. I tried installing wireshark on a throwaway > cloud instance, but realised that it's a GUI program. Can you please help > be with the network trace at > https://www.dropbox.com/s/r8cn0qggrvmrpc3/dump.pcap?dl=0 ? It's capturing > the network chatter for ~1min

Saurabh Nanda <saurabhnanda at gmail.com> writes: > 1) Why is the log saying `SMB2` everywhere? Shouldn't it be saying > `SMB3`? "SMB3" is mostly marketing, it inherits almost everything from SMB2 hence why it's often handled by SMB2 code. You will see this in Samba, Wireshark, Linux, and even Microsoft specification "MS-SMB2" which actually covers both

On 16/02/2019 02:43, Saurabh Nanda via samba wrote: >>> 2) Is this normal -- fs/cifs/smb2misc.c: Calculated size 157 length 156 >>> mismatch mid 11907 >> Could be a bug or miscalculated length + non critical warning, I also >> see this on master kernel. Either way I doubt it's slowing everything down. >> > Should I file a bug for this? > > >>

On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 09:29:50 +0530 Saurabh Nanda via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > Does anyone have any idea about this? > > > On Sat, Feb 9, 2019 at 7:22 AM Saurabh Nanda <saurabhnanda at gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Define "lots of files" ? What does ls | wc -l say ? > >> > > > > Number of files + directories: >

> Am 08.02.2019 um 14:26 schrieb Saurabh Nanda via samba <samba at lists.samba.org>: > > ## QUESTION > > I am sharing a 120GB folder with lots of files via Samba on a LAN (1Gbps > connection). > > 1) Doing an `ls -lR` on the server (on this folder) takes ~32 seconds, > compared with **72 minutes** on the client. Is this difference in > performance expected

Hi all, Behavior described in this email is identical whether I try to mount at 192.168.100.2, my desktop and location of my Samba server, or 192.168.100.239, my laptop that is remote from my desktop with Samba server... I want to mount a share defined on my Linux desktop, on my Linux laptop, as a better alternative than sshfs or NFS. I want this mount to happen as version 2.x or 3.x, not as

Sorry for a rather 'unifornative' subject, but i've little o no clue on this. I'm using at work 'pam_mount' with a rather standard configuration to mount via CIFS/SMB user's home directory, from a samba AD member server. This configuration is a bit 'old' (mint sonya, AKA Ubuntu 16.04 as a client, so samba 4.3; debian and samba 4.8 as a server), but work

I have a form_tag written like this : = form_tag search_backoffice_places_path, {:remote =>"true", :id => :searchplaceForm } do .. input fields = submit_tag t(:search) generated html is correct : <form accept-charset="UTF-8" action="/en/backoffice/places/search" data-remote="true" id="searchplaceForm" method="post"> ...

Hi, i''ve a project in wich i have 2 different rails apps accessing the same DB. The backoffice, as usual, changes data. The frontoffice has a search capabilities with acts_as_ferret (paginated) for search. Maybe this is a newbie question but, when i delete index and restart front app all the articles are indexed, but the new one''s (via backoffice) are not searchable. Does

running a scan in irb is fine : 1.9.3p194 :001 > request_url = "http://lvh.me::3000/en/backoffice/cms-admin/site/6/pages" => "http://lvh.me::3000/en/backoffice/cms-admin/site/6/pages" request_url.scan(/^([\S]+)(backoffice\/cms-admin\/site\/)(\d+)(\/pages)$/)[0][2] => "6" however running it in my controller doesn''t gives any result : (rdb:1)

I have a model ''site'' defined in a sub-folder ''cms'' class Cms::Site < ActiveRecord::Base ..... the model is loaded correctly , checked in console: application.rb config.autoload_paths += Dir["#{config.root}/app/models/**/"] console >Cms::Site.all => [] Now trying to access this model from a sites_controller ( in backoffice/cms

[rails 3.2.2] I perform an ajax call : ... $.ajax url: " /backoffice/expenses/rate" type: "GET" dataType: "json" data: project_id: $(''#project_id'').val() code: $(this).val() success: (result) -> alert result $(''#expense_price'').val(result) in

Hi Everyone, My doubts are for Samba4.1 performance related enhancements (SMB2.1 / SMB3.0). My experimental samba server hardware is running 4.1 version. Want to improve robocopy WRITE throughput from a two samba client machines (win7 or win8 or server2012 x86 servers). Someone please advice me how can I use SMB2.1 or SMB3.0 capabilities to improve WRITE throughput. I tried samba4.1

Saurabh Nanda <saurabhnanda at gmail.com> writes: > Help in analysing the tcpdump to get to the bottom of this perf issue would > be appreciated. I've looked at the trace but didn't find anything out of the ordinary. The "STATUS_NO_MORE_FILES" is erroneously taken into account in the stats because your kernel is missing this patch:

Hello, I''m developing an app that basically, receives a 10MB or less XLSX files with +30000 rows or so, and another XLSX file with about 200rows, I have to read one row of the smallest file, look it up on the largest file and write data from both files to a new one. I just did a test reading a few rows from the largest file using ROO (Spreadsheet doesn''t support XSLX and