similar to: suddenly change: idmap uid + gid

Upgraded to Samba 4.11.2 and I?ve now too started seeing the message: get_share_mode_lock: get_static_share_mode_data failed: NT_STATUS_NO_MEMORY A lot. I modified the source in source3/locking/share_mode_lock.c a bit in order to print out the values of the service path, smb_fname & old_write_time when it fails and it seems they are all NULL? [2019/11/14 14:24:23.358441, 0]

On Sun, 2019-11-03 at 07:16 +0300, ?????? via samba wrote: > Hi all. help please: > # systemctl status smbd.service > ... > Nov 03 06:53:09 server1.local.my smbd[4585]: [2019/11/03 > 06:53:09.857837, 1] > ../../source3/locking/share_mode_lock.c:597(get_share_mode_lock) > Nov 03 06:53:09 server1.local.my smbd[4585]: get_share_mode_lock: > get_static_share_mode_data

Hello all, after the upgarde from Samba 4.10.7 to 4.11.2 we get lots of these in our logfiles: 2019-11-28T20:40:44+01:00 lx-sv-09 smbd_audit: [2019/11/28 20:40:44.886615, 1] ../../source3/locking/share_mode_lock.c:597(get_share_mode_lock) 2019-11-28T20:40:44+01:00 lx-sv-09 smbd_audit: get_share_mode_lock: get_static_share_mode_data failed: NT_STATUS_NO_MEMORY There are no symptoms accept

Am 03.11.2019 um 09:42 schrieb Rowland penny via samba <samba at lists.samba.org>: > > ?On 02/11/2019 23:18, Hilberg via samba wrote: >> Hi >> >> The server suddenly changed the uid + gid. this happened to times, yesterday and the week after. The default group at example >> The samba is a AD member where we have many users (>20 000) and we use autorid in

On Sun, 2019-11-03 at 08:39 +0000, Rowland penny via samba wrote: > On 02/11/2019 23:18, Hilberg via samba wrote: > > Hi > > > > The server suddenly changed the uid + gid. this happened to times, > > yesterday and the week after. The default group at example > > The samba is a AD member where we have many users (>20 000) and we > > use > > autorid

On 03/11/2019 15:06, Liste via samba wrote: > Am 03.11.2019 um 09:42 schrieb Rowland penny via samba <samba at lists.samba.org>: >> ?On 02/11/2019 23:18, Hilberg via samba wrote: >>> Hi >>> >>> The server suddenly changed the uid + gid. this happened to times, yesterday and the week after. The default group at example >>> The samba is a AD member

On 02/11/2019 23:18, Hilberg via samba wrote: > Hi > > The server suddenly changed the uid + gid. this happened to times, > yesterday and the week after. The default group at example > The samba is a AD member where we have many users (>20 000) and we use > autorid in that way > [global] > ? security = ads > ? workgroup = CUSTOMER > ? realm = CUSTOMER.COM > ?

On 03/11/2019 20:46, Andrew Bartlett wrote: > On Sun, 2019-11-03 at 08:39 +0000, Rowland penny via samba wrote: >> On 02/11/2019 23:18, Hilberg via samba wrote: >>> Hi >>> >>> The server suddenly changed the uid + gid. this happened to times, >>> yesterday and the week after. The default group at example >>> The samba is a AD member where we

Hi all, hope, its ok, to join here.. Am Donnerstag, 14. November 2019, 14:34:29 CET schrieb Peter Eriksson via samba: > Upgraded to Samba 4.11.2 and I?ve now too started seeing the message: > > get_share_mode_lock: get_static_share_mode_data failed: NT_STATUS_NO_MEMORY > > A lot. I modified the source in source3/locking/share_mode_lock.c a bit in > order to print out the

Samba 4.10.8 - > 4.11.2 (latest update) FreeBSD 11.3-RELEASE-p3 Dell PowerEdge R730xd with 256GB RAM and some 140TB disk ZFS filesystems smb.conf: [global] private directory = /liu/etc/samba/private lock directory = /liu/var/samba/locks cache directory = /liu/var/samba/cache state directory = /liu/var/samba/state ncalrpc dir = /liu/var/samba/ncalrpc ;; Network interfaces bind

Upgrade from samba version? OS=? Smb.conf content = ? These thing do help us in helping to find your problem. So can you tell a bit more about the server. Greetz, Louis > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- > Van: samba [mailto:samba-bounces at lists.samba.org] Namens > Peter Eriksson via samba > Verzonden: donderdag 14 november 2019 14:34 > Aan: samba at lists.samba.org

Hai, I'm wondering, why this is not in 4.11 ? The current error messages, makes people look in the wrong direction. Do you know if its prepaired it for next release? Else i'll patch it into my builds. Rowland, tell me, how did you find the change through git, thats still a part i need to improve. :-/ I looked in bugzilla, but was not able to find it. Thanks, i noticed this one

On 29/11/2019 08:04, Christian Naumer via samba wrote: > Hello all, > after the upgarde from Samba 4.10.7 to 4.11.2 we get lots of these in > our logfiles: > > > 2019-11-28T20:40:44+01:00 lx-sv-09 smbd_audit: [2019/11/28 > 20:40:44.886615, 1] > ../../source3/locking/share_mode_lock.c:597(get_share_mode_lock) > 2019-11-28T20:40:44+01:00 lx-sv-09 smbd_audit:

On Tuesday, 5 November 2019 01:37:15 PST Rowland penny via samba wrote: > On 04/11/2019 18:52, Alexey A Nikitin wrote: > > On Sunday, 3 November 2019 01:41:18 PST Rowland penny via samba wrote: > >> As I said, you cannot use 'winbind use default domain = yes' with > >> 'autorid', it makes all users and groups members of the same domain, > >> this

On Sunday, 3 November 2019 01:41:18 PST Rowland penny via samba wrote: > As I said, you cannot use 'winbind use default domain = yes' with > 'autorid', it makes all users and groups members of the same domain, > this is probably what has happened here. > > Remove the line, this should stop it happening again > > If you have only one domain, then you

Hi list, I'm getting a lot of these on a CTDB cluster serving files to Windows clients: [2016/06/24 08:53:55.555485, 1] ../librpc/ndr/ndr.c:578(ndr_pull_error) ndr_pull_error(11): Pull bytes 4 (../librpc/ndr/ndr_basic.c:150) [2016/06/24 08:53:55.555506, 1] ../source3/locking/share_mode_lock.c:141(parse_share_modes) ndr_pull_share_mode_lock failed: Buffer Size Error [2016/06/24

Hello everyone, I hope you are well. Take care of yourself. I have the same problem as describe here: https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2014-December/187545.html I migrate a file share from a MAC-OS environment. For its new storage system, the company purchased an ASUSTOR NAS. This NAS works with an operating system based on version 4.14 of the GNU / LINUX x86_64 kernel. This NAS operates a

On 29/09/2020 08:35, Ralph Boehme via samba wrote: > Am 9/29/20 um 7:44 AM schrieb Christian Kuntz via samba: >> Is the wiki information still accurate? If so, what needs to change about >> my configuration to fix this issue? >> If the information is out of date and the modern utility of "use mmap = no" >> is unknown, how can I test it? > hm, I guess the

Show the servers there smb.conf that might help. And your using autorid.. https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Idmap_config_autorid Drawbacks: User and group IDs are not equal across Samba domain members. TC84\administrator:*:1100500:1100513::/home/administrator at TC84 TC83\administrator:*:1200500:1200513::/home/administrator at TC83 1200500-1100500 = 100000 idmap config * : rangesize =

On Sun, Feb 24, 2019 at 08:16:55AM +0000, Rowland Penny via samba wrote: > Well yes, it could be used for the default domain, but what about the > 'DOMAIN' domain ? > > From my understanding, the default range is meant for the Well Known > SIDs and anything outside the given domains and there are less than two > hundred Well known SIDs. > > To be honest, I have