similar to: CIFS client mounts meta ops 30 times slow than server

On Fri, Mar 10, 2023 at 01:41:57AM +0800, Shenyue Chen wrote: > Hi Jeremy, thanks for the quick response! > Yes, BeeGFS is a clustered file system. It's just behaving like a regular > FS after mounted.? > We mount it on the SMB server and re-export the mounted folder to the > linux CIFS clients. > Here is a config file on the SMB server FYI. Most of the options?we

Also from my observation, based on network packets and time measurements, it seems the CIFS clients haven't done any sort of cache. For example, doing a "ls" for 5 times on the same folder within a short period of time. The network packet sizes are almost equal every time and the time it takes is similar. Isn't there supposed to be some page cache or dentry cache that could

Hi Samba users, We would like to use samba for re-exporting our other distributed file system (BeeGFS). However, we found that the meta data operations are very slow (dir stat, removal etc.). On SMB client the performance is more than 30x slow than on the SMB server. We would expect some slowness but this is too big a drop. This is the result on CIFS client $ sudo mdtest -b 10 -I 10 -L -z 2

Dear Jeremy, thanks for your instant reply. :-) Along with Linux native getfacl/fetfacl, I also tested getcifsacl/setcifsacl (for sure thoroughly ;-)). Unfortunately, these CIFS client tools seem to have been designed as part of the "old" CIFS Unix Extensions, working only for SMB/CIFS mounts, and are not supposed to work with SMB2/SMB3 mounts, as I guess. During my tests, the

Found some more info: mount.cifs to mount shares from my DCs (samba 4.2.11) works mount.cifs to mount shares from smbserver (also 4.2.11) does NOT work. Here is the debug log it produces: > root at epo:/proc/fs/cifs# mount.cifs //smbserver.domain.com/share /mnt -o username=username,domain=WRKGRP,sec=ntlmsspi > Password: > Apr 19 15:19:58 epo kernel: [74522.479080]

Using samba 3.2.1, when trying to mount cifs mounts at boot from in the /etc/fstab, I get the following error in my syslog: CIFS VFS: cifs_mount failed w/return code = -22 After enabling debugging from the /proc interface, I get this: fs/cifs/cifsfs.c: Devname: //skuld.tolharadys.net/greeneg flags: 0 fs/cifs/connect.c: CIFS VFS: in cifs_mount as Xid: 10 with uid: 0 fs/cifs/connect.c:

On 04/19/2016 8:39 AM, lists wrote: > Found some more info: > > mount.cifs to mount shares from my DCs (samba 4.2.11) works > mount.cifs to mount shares from smbserver (also 4.2.11) does NOT work. > > Here is the debug log it produces: > >> root at epo:/proc/fs/cifs# mount.cifs //smbserver.domain.com/share /mnt >> -o username=username,domain=WRKGRP,sec=ntlmsspi

On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 04:51:21PM +0000, Kraus, Sebastian via samba wrote: > Thanks for the first reply, Jeremy. > What about the (future) implementation of RichACL? Windows ACLs map quite well into RichACLs. Unfortunately Christolph Hellwig has peristently blocked any merge of the RichACLs code into the Linux kernel. If you use ZFS then you can use ZFSACLs which are quivalent. >

On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 09:03:41AM -0800, Jeremy Allison via samba wrote: > > Check out the latest cifsfs code. I think Steve > and Aurelian and Ronnie added an ioctl for this. > > I'm here at Vault in Boston with Steve, I'll ask > him :-). Steve says there are two utilities in Linux, getcifsacl and setcifsacl that use a custom ioctl inside the Linux cifsfs kernel

Thanks for the first reply, Jeremy. What about the (future) implementation of RichACL? Will there be any native Linux Client support along with the SMB2/SMB3 protocol? I know, there is a native implemenation for RichACLs in ext4 FS. Unfortunately, smbcals is not a native Linux ACL Tool and has a very unhandy syntax. I just tested some days ago. ;-) I am looking for a solution that allows the

Greetings, I am working on getting mount.cifs version: 1.11-3.2.4 on debian to mount a share on a samba server Version 3.0.13-1.1-SUSE on SuSe. This was working on older debian systems, but upon upgrading some of the systems to Lenny I am now having trouble mounting shares. Again, this was working and I have smbfs installed on the systems (which is what I used before). The samba server is set

Hi, I just installed CIFS support on my machines and must say it works much better than smbfs. special characters alright, transfer speed doubled (from 2.8MB/s to 5.6MB/s on 100MBit). There's two issues tho I haven't been able to root out: -credentials file: tried username=<username> and password=<password> in /etc/credfile, tried user=<username> to match the

On Friday 4th March 2005, Steven French said, in part: > I did some experiments and confirmed that for this "deep mapping" > (http://www.windowsnetworking.com/articles_tutorials/w2kdmap.html) mount of > a complex target ie \\server\share\dir > 1) the path component following the share name is not sent by windows (it > is sent by linux cifs and smbfs - and samba then

Hi, I'm trying to mount a Samba share on Linux 2.6.10, using samba-3.0.7. The authentication is done using Kerberos V5, on a Windows server. The share is located on a Solaris server that uses samba-3.0.10. Authentication with Kerberos is functional (I can get a ticket using kinit(1)). The server requires client (packet?) signing. The admins in charge of the server refuse to make it

On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 02:59:18AM -0400, Felix Miata via samba wrote: > Items in dmesg when FAT share's are accessed from web browser: > CIFS VFS: bogus file nlink value 0 nlink should never be zero. If an SMB server returns that, then the CIFSFS client will have to fake it to 1 at least. > When accessed from FC/L (OFM (orthodox filemanager)): > CIFS VFS: illegal date, month 0

On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 10:48:34AM -0400, Felix Miata via samba wrote: > Jeremy Allison via samba composed on 2020-04-24 11:13 (UTC-0700): > > Looking at that trace the client is doing a QPATHINFO request > > (SMBtrans2 request) with level 263 - Query File All Info. > > > The OS/2 server doesn't support that, so the client then > > drops back and does a SMB1

Would be good to continue to encourage backports by the distros of recent kernel cifs, not just for encryption support, but also for SMB3 DFS support and various other features, and some very exciting patches are in progress for the upcoming kernels. On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 6:49 PM, Steve French <smfrench at gmail.com> wrote: > Kernel cifs supports encryption!! (Thank you Pavel for good

CIFS or SMB3 mount (vers=3.0)? I doubt that RHEL has backported the encryption feature in the kernel client yet, but would be a good question for RHEL support. On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 1:15 AM, amit kumar <amitkuma at redhat.com> wrote: > Dear Team, > I am trying to use this option on RHEL-6.9(samba3.6) version while > accessing samba shares, but its not working?? > Is this

Hi there Firstly, you may want to check out this thread on Experts Exchange: http://www.experts-exchange.com/Operating_Systems/Linux/Q_20815085.html essentially this is my problem - I can connect to and browse a windows file share with smbclient, but when i try to mount it with mount.cifs I get errors. Note that this only happens when I have to authenticate to a domain controller - I can use

Maybe a bit OT... I'm no expert on either, but the concepts are quite similar. Both require "extra" nodes (metadata and monitor), but those can be virtual machines or you can host the services on OSD machines. We don't use snapshots, so I can't comment on that. My experience with Ceph is limited to having it working on Proxmox. No experience yet with CephFS. BeeGFS is