similar to: NFS cache flush tester

Hello, I have some trouble with the current setup (it's a testing environment): 2 server with Dovecot 1.1.4 from source (OS Debian testing 2.6.26) (name: "exim" and "exim2") 1 NFS server (OS Debian testing 2.6.26) I use NFS v.4, indexes shared over NFS. The relavant part of Dovecot configuration: dotlock_use_excl = yes mail_nfs_storage = yes mail_nfs_index = yes

mainly question for the intel folks, any chance to rerun the ltp testsuites to see how we are doing these days with all the changes ? thanks :) Wim

Raghavendra, Thanks very much for your reply. I fixed our data corruption problem by disabling the volume performance.write-behind flag as you suggested, and simultaneously disabling caching in my client side mount command. In very modest testing, the flock() case appears to me to work well - before it would corrupt the db within a few transactions. Testing using built in sqlite3 locks is

Hi, tl;dr summary of below: flock() works, but what does it take to make sync()/fsync() work in a 3 node GFS cluster? I am under the impression that POSIX flock, POSIX fcntl(F_SETLK/F_GETLK,...), and POSIX read/write/sync/fsync are all supported in cluster operations, such that in theory, SQLite3 should be able to atomically lock the file (or a subset of page), modify pages, flush the pages to

+Csaba. On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 2:52 AM, Paul Anderson <pha at umich.edu> wrote: > Raghavendra, > > Thanks very much for your reply. > > I fixed our data corruption problem by disabling the volume > performance.write-behind flag as you suggested, and simultaneously > disabling caching in my client side mount command. > Good to know it worked. Can you give us the

Raghavendra, I've commited my tests case to https://github.com/powool/gluster.git - it's grungy, and a work in progress, but I am happy to take change suggestions, especially if it will save folks significant time. For the rest, I'll reply inline below... On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 10:39 PM, Raghavendra Gowdappa <rgowdapp at redhat.com> wrote: > +Csaba. > > On Tue, Mar 6,

Hello, Iam facing a problem in locking of files across samba shares. We have samba 3.0.10 running on Solaris 9 with the smb.conf as follows. # Global parameters [global] workgroup = NMUINT netbios name = NMUINTFS interfaces = <IP> bind interfaces only = Yes security = DOMAIN password server = XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX log level = 1 ldap

On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 8:21 PM, Paul Anderson <pha at umich.edu> wrote: > Hi, > > tl;dr summary of below: flock() works, but what does it take to make > sync()/fsync() work in a 3 node GFS cluster? > > I am under the impression that POSIX flock, POSIX > fcntl(F_SETLK/F_GETLK,...), and POSIX read/write/sync/fsync are all > supported in cluster operations, such that in

While doing migration, sometimes found suspend lock file was not unlinked in previous operations, then there is an obsolete lock file in place, which causes the current and later migration cannot get lock. That happens seldomly but do happen. After checking the source code, I found there are some places that potentially cause lock file unlinked, including: 1) in lock_suspend_event() function,

On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 10:58 PM, Raghavendra Gowdappa <rgowdapp at redhat.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 10:22 PM, Paul Anderson <pha at umich.edu> wrote: > >> Raghavendra, >> >> I've commited my tests case to https://github.com/powool/gluster.git - >> it's grungy, and a work in progress, but I am happy to take change >>

On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 10:22 PM, Paul Anderson <pha at umich.edu> wrote: > Raghavendra, > > I've commited my tests case to https://github.com/powool/gluster.git - > it's grungy, and a work in progress, but I am happy to take change > suggestions, especially if it will save folks significant time. > > For the rest, I'll reply inline below... > > On Mon,

Hi Jones, many thanks again four your help and your time. Thanks for the patch too - I'll check it up. On my Ubuntu, there is a Samba 4.1.6. I'll install the samba source package, and will try to apply the patch, then - I hope - the package will be compiled as well. I'll notify to you about the result. (First, I need to upgrade that server.) Thanks again, Ervin On Thu, Apr

Hi Louis, On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 01:15:21PM +0200, L.P.H. van Belle wrote: > Or.. > get the sources and recompile agains 14.04 > > use the following commands. > enable the deb-src in /etc/apt/sources.list > and run : > > apt-get build-dep sernet-samba > apt-get source sernet-samba -b > > you wil end up with .deb files ;-) yep, thanks - I'll check it

Hello, This series introduces arm64 support to klibc. I've rebased the work from Neil Williams and Anil Singhar into the following three patches. Most of the code changes are due to new syscall implementations being needed for arm64 as a only a minimal set of syscalls are defined in the arm64 kernel. This series is to be applied against the latest klibc, just after 25a66fa README.klibc:

On Wed, 30 May 2018 15:26:37 +0200 "Stefan G. Weichinger via samba" <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > Am 2018-05-30 um 15:01 schrieb Rowland Penny via samba: > > > There are three main winbind backends, but only two are really used > > on Unix domain members, the 'ad' and the 'rid' backends. Which you > > use is really down to a simple

IRIX 6.5 has the basename() function in libgen. SYNOPSIS cc [flag ...] file ... -lgen [library ...] #include <libgen.h> char *basename (char *path); -- ayamura

I am trying to see if Samba 4.2.0rc4 will run on a Solaris 10 i386 system. After getting it to build, startup fails. Starting it up as smbd -i -d 10 The output indicates that everything is starting normally until the following is output: messaging_dgm_lockfile_create: ftruncate failed: Invalid argument messaging_dgm_init: messaging_dgm_create_lockfile failed: Invalid argument messaging_dgm_init

/etc/postfix/main.cf.default: mailbox_delivery_lock = flock, dotlock Is flock equivalent to dovecot's fnctl locking? For mbox what type of locking settings should I be using? (No NFS, only local filesystem.) Warren Togami warren at togami.com

Hi Jones, many thanks for your reply. Yepp, I'm using ACL's (Posix ACL's) on filesystem to regulate the access of users for files and directories. Do you mean that this is the "normal" way? These geteuid and getegid system calls are so slow? On the previous system (Debian Wheezy, Samba 3) I've also used ACL's, but there were much faster than this... What should

Resent to the list since I didn't think you would mind. Kevin wrote: > Eric, > > I have been using your vm outcall script for some time and it has worked > well. Thanks for your efforts. > > I am trying to re-install and I can't seem to get a call file generated. > I have set up postfix and in the log it appears that it pipes the > message to the vmoutcall