similar to: How to test the concurrency of SMB3

________________________________ ???: chin housin <sharingfun520 at outlook.com> ????: 2024?7?25? 11:58 ???: 1119542281 at qq.com <1119542281 at qq.com> ??: ??: [Samba] ??: segfault when tdb_mutex_unlock Thanks for your help.Although the situation was relieved with 'idmap config DOMAIN backend =rid' on samba-4.19.3, the issue occures after three days running.I promise that I

Dear all Recently, i did some work to test small files performance for gnfsv3 transport. Following is my scenario. #####environment##### ==2 cluster nodes(nodeA/nodeB)== each is equipped with E5-2650*2, 128G memory and 10GB*2 netcard nodeA: 10.254.3.77 10.128.3.77 nodeB: 10.254.3.78 10.128.3.78 ==2 stress nodes(clientA/clientB)== each is equipped with E5-2650*2, 128G memory and 10GB*2

Hi, I am running samba-4.1.4 on my Fedora OS. I have provided the "client max protocol = SMB3" and "server max protocol = SMB3" parameters in smb.conf file I'm able to get only SMB2.1 packets using wireshark after fileshare access from my windows 7 machine. And not SMB3 packets. SMB2->NegotiateProtocol Response 0x0202 0x0210 Samba-4.1.4 is supporting SMB3 also. So

The SMB3 POSIX extensions is different from the old Unix extensions. The Unix extensions can only support vers=1.0, but the new SMB3 POSIX extensions can support SMB3.1.1, vers=3.1.1. You can check this 2018 presentation slides: https://www.snia.org/sites/default/files/SDC/2018/presentations/SMB/Steve_French_SMB311.pdf Page 12 shows that POSIX extensions has been added. Page 22 shows that SMB3

Hi All, The man page for smb.conf says that 'client max protocol = default' is the same as 'client max protocol = NT1' for the HEAD samba version. Is there some reason I should not change that to SMB3? Thanks! Chad.

Hello.. My server have this settings in [global] section: max protocol = smb3 min protocol = smb2 When I try connect to server using my clients (Centos 7.3/Ubuntu 16.04) I can't because clients still trying NT1. I must explicity add in smb.conf on clients the option ' client max protocol = smb3' and the connections works again. The question is: If I have defined the min and max

Hi Samba-people, Arnold Jones, Technical Council Managing Director or the Storage Network Industry Association (SNIA) asked me to forward this invitation to anyone who would like to participate in the SMB3 IO Lab. --------------------------------------------------------------- Hi Samba Developers, Presentations are only part of what is going on at the SNIA?s 2023 Storage Developer

Hi Samba-people, Arnold Jones, Technical Council Managing Director or the Storage Network Industry Association (SNIA) asked me to forward this invitation to anyone who would like to participate in the SMB3 IO Lab. --------------------------------------------------------------- Hi Samba Developers, Presentations are only part of what is going on at the SNIA?s 2023 Storage Developer

I know SMB2 support was added for the smbclient in samba 4.1.0, but was SMB3 support also added ? Is there a way to just make smbclient ? Mike

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

Hi all, Quick question - does Samba server still support Unix extensions when connecting over SMB3? My Linux client recently got upgraded to a CIFS module version that uses SMB3 by default, and since then I lost the ability to create symlinks on my CIFS shares. Running "mount" shows the share mounted with the "nounix" option. If I follow the advice in dmesg and add the

Dear all, what is about the support for POSIX ACL in Samba protocol implementation of SMB2 and SMB3? >From what I extracted from SNIA and SambaXP developer conference talks and as well as the official Samba Wiki, support for POSIX ACL in SMB2 and SMB3 has been completely abandonned. Am I right? If so, is there any other possibility to allow Linux Clients to natively access access control lists

Where is the patch?I can help to get this integrated -----邮件原件----- 发件人: Jeremy Allison [mailto:jra at samba.org] 发送时间: 2016年9月1日 7:57 收件人: Michael Adam 抄送: zhengbin 08747 (RD); weidong 12656 (RD); 'samba at lists.samba.org' 主题: Re: [Samba] status of Continuous availability in SMB3 On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 10:29:51AM +0200, Michael Adam via samba wrote: > On 2016-08-31 at 08:13 +0000,

On 2016-08-31 at 08:13 +0000, zhengbin.08747 at h3c.com wrote: > hi Michael Adam: > Thanks for you work on samba. Here I am looking for some advice and your help. > I have been stuck in continuous availability of samba 4.3.9 for two weeks. Continuous availability in SMB3 is an attractive feature and I am strugling to enable it. > > smb.conf, ctdb.conf are attached. Cluster file

In current kernels we have the new IOCTL / QueryInfo passthrough where you can use a simple ioctl() on an object in a SMB2/3 share and pull the full security descriptor. It would be fairly trivial to expand this to allow setting the security descriptor too using SetInfo. We can add that when there is a need. Now, since this is available through a simple ioctl() interface, you can access this

On 11/28/24 9:46 PM, Andrew Gunnerson wrote: > Thanks for the replies! > > On Thu, Nov 28, 2024, at 04:34, Rowland Penny via samba wrote: >> I do not use the SMB3 Unix extensions, but perhaps you may not be >> either, have you tried replacing 'server min protocol = SMB2' (which is >> the default anyway) with 'server min protocol = SMB3' ? > > I

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 replies! On Thu, Nov 28, 2024, at 04:34, Rowland Penny via samba wrote: > I do not use the SMB3 Unix extensions, but perhaps you may not be > either, have you tried replacing 'server min protocol = SMB2' (which is > the default anyway) with 'server min protocol = SMB3' ? I took a packet capture and do see the the client making POSIX extension requests,

Hi, is there an option in samba 4.1.x to have an smbd require SMB3 encrypted transport on share level? I can't seem to find anything like it. Thanks, -- Michael Weiser science + computing ag Senior Systems Engineer Geschaeftsstelle Duesseldorf Faehrstrasse 1 phone: +49 211 302 708 32 D-40221 Duesseldorf fax: +49 211 302 708 50

On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 03:05:12PM +0000, Kraus, Sebastian via samba wrote: > Dear all, > what is about the support for POSIX ACL in Samba protocol implementation of SMB2 and SMB3? > From what I extracted from SNIA and SambaXP developer conference talks and as well as the official Samba Wiki, > support for POSIX ACL in SMB2 and SMB3 has been completely abandonned. Am I right? Yes.