thr3ads.net - zfs discuss - [zfs-discuss] CIFS shares being lost [Nov 2009]

If this information is useful, please help other people find it:
Share via:

Emily Grettel

2009-Nov-21 00:17 UTC

[zfs-discuss] CIFS shares being lost

Hi,

 

I''m just starting out on ZFS and OpenSolaris (2009.06) and I''m
having an issue with CIFS shares not working after a while. I have about 30
users, I''ve updated our NT scripts to mount the share at startup and
this works OK. If I leave the server up, after a day the CIFS stop working.

 

I have 4 file systems on a raidz2 zpool, all four of these are visible as CIFS
shares.

 

I''m not sure how to debug or look for where things may be going awry,
could anyone tell me or point me in the right direction?

 

Thanks,

Emily

 

--

Emily
 		 	   		  
_________________________________________________________________
Want to know what your boss is paid? Check out The Great Australian Pay Check
now
http://clk.atdmt.com/NMN/go/157639755/direct/01/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/zfs-discuss/attachments/20091121/2362e225/attachment.html>

Tim Cook

2009-Nov-21 00:30 UTC

head link

[zfs-discuss] CIFS shares being lost

On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 6:17 PM, Emily Grettel <
emilygrettelisnow at hotmail.com> wrote:
>  Hi,
>
> I''m just starting out on ZFS and OpenSolaris (2009.06) and
I''m having an
> issue with CIFS shares not working after a while. I have about 30 users,
> I''ve updated our NT scripts to mount the share at startup and this
works OK.
> If I leave the server up, after a day the CIFS stop working.
>
> I have 4 file systems on a raidz2 zpool, all four of these are visible as
> CIFS shares.
>
> I''m not sure how to debug or look for where things may be going
awry, could
> anyone tell me or point me in the right direction?
>
> Thanks,
> Emily
>
> --
> Emily
>
CIFS information generally gets dumped into /var/adm/messages.  What do you
mean by "it stops working".  You have to remount the shares?  You have
the
reboot the server?  What is the process to make it "work" again?

-- 
--Tim
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/zfs-discuss/attachments/20091120/a12e4484/attachment.html>

Emily Grettel

2009-Nov-21 00:41 UTC

head link

[zfs-discuss] CIFS shares being lost

Wow that was mighty quick Tim!
 
Sorry, I have to reboot the server. I can SSH into the box, VNC etc but no CIFS
shares are visible.
 
Here are the last few messages from /var/adm/messages

Nov 20 23:48:55 sta-nas-01 pcplusmp: [ID 805372 kern.info] pcplusmp: ide (ata)
instance 0 irq 0xe vector 0x41 ioapic 0x2 intin 0xe is bound to cpu 0
Nov 20 23:48:55 sta-nas-01 pcplusmp: [ID 805372 kern.info] pcplusmp: ide (ata)
instance 1 irq 0xf vector 0x41 ioapic 0x2 intin 0xf is bound to cpu 1
Nov 20 23:48:55 sta-nas-01 pcplusmp: [ID 805372 kern.info] pcplusmp: ide (ata)
instance 0 irq 0xe vector 0x41 ioapic 0x2 intin 0xe is bound to cpu 0
Nov 20 23:48:55 sta-nas-01 pcplusmp: [ID 805372 kern.info] pcplusmp: ide (ata)
instance 1 irq 0xf vector 0x41 ioapic 0x2 intin 0xf is bound to cpu 1
Nov 20 23:48:55 sta-nas-01 pcplusmp: [ID 805372 kern.info] pcplusmp: ide (ata)
instance 0 irq 0xe vector 0x41 ioapic 0x2 intin 0xe is bound to cpu 0
Nov 20 23:48:55 sta-nas-01 pcplusmp: [ID 805372 kern.info] pcplusmp: ide (ata)
instance 1 irq 0xf vector 0x41 ioapic 0x2 intin 0xf is bound to cpu 1
Nov 20 23:48:55 sta-nas-01 smbd[552]: [ID 413393 daemon.error] dyndns: failed to
get domainname
Nov 20 23:50:44 sta-nas-01 last message repeated 4 times
Nov 20 23:50:45 sta-nas-01 zoneadmd[2329]: [ID 702911 daemon.error] [zone
''tomcat01''] WARNING: e1000g3:1: no matching subnet found in
netmasks(4): 192.168.0.122; using default of 255.255.255.0.
Nov 20 23:50:45 sta-nas-01 smbd[552]: [ID 413393 daemon.error] dyndns: failed to
get domainname
Nov 20 23:50:46 sta-nas-01 last message repeated 2 times
Nov 20 23:51:07 sta-nas-01 smbd[552]: [ID 413393 daemon.error] dyndns: failed to
get domainname
Nov 20 23:54:58 sta-nas-01 last message repeated 7 times
Nov 21 00:12:34 sta-nas-01 in.routed[510]: [ID 464608 daemon.error] route
0.0.0.0 --> 192.168.101.100 nexthop is not directly connected
Nov 21 01:12:34 sta-nas-01 in.routed[510]: [ID 464608 daemon.error] route
0.0.0.0 --> 192.168.101.100 nexthop is not directly connected
Nov 21 02:12:34 sta-nas-01 in.routed[510]: [ID 464608 daemon.error] route
0.0.0.0 --> 192.168.101.100 nexthop is not directly connected
Nov 21 03:12:34 sta-nas-01 in.routed[510]: [ID 464608 daemon.error] route
0.0.0.0 --> 192.168.101.100 nexthop is not directly connected
Nov 21 04:17:33 sta-nas-01 in.routed[510]: [ID 464608 daemon.error] route
0.0.0.0 --> 192.168.101.100 nexthop is not directly connected
Nov 21 05:17:33 sta-nas-01 in.routed[510]: [ID 464608 daemon.error] route
0.0.0.0 --> 192.168.101.100 nexthop is not directly connected
Nov 21 06:17:33 sta-nas-01 in.routed[510]: [ID 464608 daemon.error] route
0.0.0.0 --> 192.168.101.100 nexthop is not directly connected
Nov 21 07:17:33 sta-nas-01 in.routed[510]: [ID 464608 daemon.error] route
0.0.0.0 --> 192.168.101.100 nexthop is not directly connected
Nov 21 08:17:33 sta-nas-01 in.routed[510]: [ID 464608 daemon.error] route
0.0.0.0 --> 192.168.101.100 nexthop is not directly connected
Nov 21 09:17:33 sta-nas-01 in.routed[510]: [ID 464608 daemon.error] route
0.0.0.0 --> 192.168.101.100 nexthop is not directly connected
Nov 21 10:17:33 sta-nas-01 in.routed[510]: [ID 464608 daemon.error] route
0.0.0.0 --> 192.168.101.100 nexthop is not directly connected
Nov 21 11:17:33 sta-nas-01 in.routed[510]: [ID 464608 daemon.error] route
0.0.0.0 --> 192.168.101.100 nexthop is not directly connected

Does that help? I setup a zone to run tomcat on the same box and we also have a
VirtualBox image of Windows 2003 which is used to synchronise our backups with
another server (remotely) using Acronis.
 
Thanks,
Em

 


Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 18:30:01 -0600
Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] CIFS shares being lost
From: tim at cook.ms
To: emilygrettelisnow at hotmail.com
CC: zfs-discuss at opensolaris.org




On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 6:17 PM, Emily Grettel <emilygrettelisnow at
hotmail.com> wrote:


Hi,
 
I''m just starting out on ZFS and OpenSolaris (2009.06) and I''m
having an issue with CIFS shares not working after a while. I have about 30
users, I''ve updated our NT scripts to mount the share at startup and
this works OK. If I leave the server up, after a day the CIFS stop working.
 
I have 4 file systems on a raidz2 zpool, all four of these are visible as CIFS
shares.
 
I''m not sure how to debug or look for where things may be going awry,
could anyone tell me or point me in the right direction?
 
Thanks,
Emily
 
--
Emily

CIFS information generally gets dumped into /var/adm/messages.  What do you mean
by "it stops working".  You have to remount the shares?  You have the
reboot the server?  What is the process to make it "work" again?

-- 
--Tim
 		 	   		  
_________________________________________________________________
Looking to move this spring? With all the lastest places, searching has never
been easier. Look now!
http://clk.atdmt.com/NMN/go/157631292/direct/01/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/zfs-discuss/attachments/20091121/b97ca74f/attachment.html>

Tim Cook

2009-Nov-21 00:47 UTC

head link

[zfs-discuss] CIFS shares being lost

On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 6:41 PM, Emily Grettel <
emilygrettelisnow at hotmail.com> wrote:
>  Wow that was mighty quick Tim!
>
> Sorry, I have to reboot the server. I can SSH into the box, VNC etc but no
> CIFS shares are visible.
>
> Here are the last few messages from /var/adm/messages
>
> Nov 20 23:48:55 sta-nas-01 pcplusmp: [ID 805372 kern.info] pcplusmp: ide
> (ata) instance 0 irq 0xe vector 0x41 ioapic 0x2 intin 0xe is bound to cpu 0
> Nov 20 23:48:55 sta-nas-01 pcplusmp: [ID 805372 kern.info] pcplusmp: ide
> (ata) instance 1 irq 0xf vector 0x41 ioapic 0x2 intin 0xf is bound to cpu 1
> Nov 20 23:48:55 sta-nas-01 pcplusmp: [ID 805372 kern.info] pcplusmp: ide
> (ata) instance 0 irq 0xe vector 0x41 ioapic 0x2 intin 0xe is bound to cpu 0
> Nov 20 23:48:55 sta-nas-01 pcplusmp: [ID 805372 kern.info] pcplusmp: ide
> (ata) instance 1 irq 0xf vector 0x41 ioapic 0x2 intin 0xf is bound to cpu 1
> Nov 20 23:48:55 sta-nas-01 pcplusmp: [ID 805372 kern.info] pcplusmp: ide
> (ata) instance 0 irq 0xe vector 0x41 ioapic 0x2 intin 0xe is bound to cpu 0
> Nov 20 23:48:55 sta-nas-01 pcplusmp: [ID 805372 kern.info] pcplusmp: ide
> (ata) instance 1 irq 0xf vector 0x41 ioapic 0x2 intin 0xf is bound to cpu 1
> Nov 20 23:48:55 sta-nas-01 smbd[552]: [ID 413393 daemon.error] dyndns:
> failed to get domainname
> Nov 20 23:50:44 sta-nas-01 last message repeated 4 times
> Nov 20 23:50:45 sta-nas-01 zoneadmd[2329]: [ID 702911 daemon.error] [zone
> ''tomcat01''] WARNING: e1000g3:1: no matching subnet found
in netmasks(4):
> 192.168.0.122; using default of 255.255.255.0.
> Nov 20 23:50:45 sta-nas-01 smbd[552]: [ID 413393 daemon.error] dyndns:
> failed to get domainname
> Nov 20 23:50:46 sta-nas-01 last message repeated 2 times
> Nov 20 23:51:07 sta-nas-01 smbd[552]: [ID 413393 daemon.error] dyndns:
> failed to get domainname
> Nov 20 23:54:58 sta-nas-01 last message repeated 7 times
> Nov 21 00:12:34 sta-nas-01 in.routed[510]: [ID 464608 daemon.error] route
> 0.0.0.0 --> 192.168.101.100 nexthop is not directly connected
> Nov 21 01:12:34 sta-nas-01 in.routed[510]: [ID 464608 daemon.error] route
> 0.0.0.0 --> 192.168.101.100 nexthop is not directly connected
> Nov 21 02:12:34 sta-nas-01 in.routed[510]: [ID 464608 daemon.error] route
> 0.0.0.0 --> 192.168.101.100 nexthop is not directly connected
> Nov 21 03:12:34 sta-nas-01 in.routed[510]: [ID 464608 daemon.error] route
> 0.0.0.0 --> 192.168.101.100 nexthop is not directly connected
> Nov 21 04:17:33 sta-nas-01 in.routed[510]: [ID 464608 daemon.error] route
> 0.0.0.0 --> 192.168.101.100 nexthop is not directly connected
> Nov 21 05:17:33 sta-nas-01 in.routed[510]: [ID 464608 daemon.error] route
> 0.0.0.0 --> 192.168.101.100 nexthop is not directly connected
> Nov 21 06:17:33 sta-nas-01 in.routed[510]: [ID 464608 daemon.error] route
> 0.0.0.0 --> 192.168.101.100 nexthop is not directly connected
> Nov 21 07:17:33 sta-nas-01 in.routed[510]: [ID 464608 daemon.error] route
> 0.0.0.0 --> 192.168.101.100 nexthop is not directly connected
> Nov 21 08:17:33 sta-nas-01 in.routed[510]: [ID 464608 daemon.error] route
> 0.0.0.0 --> 192.168.101.100 nexthop is not directly connected
> Nov 21 09:17:33 sta-nas-01 in.routed[510]: [ID 464608 daemon.error] route
> 0.0.0.0 --> 192.168.101.100 nexthop is not directly connected
> Nov 21 10:17:33 sta-nas-01 in.routed[510]: [ID 464608 daemon.error] route
> 0.0.0.0 --> 192.168.101.100 nexthop is not directly connected
> Nov 21 11:17:33 sta-nas-01 in.routed[510]: [ID 464608 daemon.error] route
> 0.0.0.0 --> 192.168.101.100 nexthop is not directly connected
>
> Does that help? I setup a zone to run tomcat on the same box and we also
> have a VirtualBox image of Windows 2003 which is used to synchronise our
> backups with another server (remotely) using Acronis.
>
> Thanks,
> Em
>
>Nope.  Typically errors with cifs (assuming you''re using the native
cifs
implementation) will show up as errors with smbd or idmapd.  For instance,
when my clock was off, I had the following:

Nov 10 18:08:35 fserv smbd[1063]: [ID 521964 daemon.error] k5_kinit: getting
initial credentials (Clock skew too great)
Nov 10 18:08:35 fserv smbd[1063]: [ID 702911 daemon.notice] Failed to
connect to an Active Directory server.
Nov 10 18:08:35 fserv smbd[1063]: [ID 871254 daemon.error] smbd: failed
joining DOMAIN (UNSUCCESSFUL)
Nov 10 18:08:47 fserv smbd[1063]: [ID 521964 daemon.error] k5_kinit: getting
initial credentials (Clock skew too great)
Nov 10 18:08:47 fserv smbd[1063]: [ID 702911 daemon.notice] Failed to
connect to an Active Directory server.
Nov 10 18:08:47 fserv smbd[1063]: [ID 871254 daemon.error] smbd: failed
joining DOMAIN.local (UNSUCCESSFUL)
Nov 10 18:09:49 fserv smbd[1063]: [ID 521964 daemon.error] k5_kinit: getting
initial credentials (Clock skew too great)
Nov 10 18:09:49 fserv smbd[1063]: [ID 702911 daemon.notice] Failed to
connect to an Active Directory server.
Nov 10 18:09:49 fserv smbd[1063]: [ID 871254 daemon.error] smbd: failed
joining DOMAIN.local (UNSUCCESSFUL)
Nov 10 19:12:59 fserv idmapd[367]: [ID 558913 daemon.notice] AD lookup by
winname failed
Nov 10 19:12:59 fserv smbd[1138]: [ID 600500 daemon.warning] smb_pwdutil:
couldn''t obtain SID for uid=101 (-9961)
Nov 10 19:13:11 fserv smbd[1138]: [ID 266262 daemon.error] DOMAIN\user:
idmap failed
Nov 10 19:13:16 fserv last message repeated 1 time
Nov 10 19:13:33 fserv idmapd[367]: [ID 694198 daemon.notice] Configuration
changed

I''d suggest doing something like a (minus the ''''):
''cat /var/adm/messages | grep smbd''
''cat /var/adm/messages | grep idmapd''


-- 
--Tim
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/zfs-discuss/attachments/20091120/7d6b0445/attachment.html>

Emily Grettel

2009-Nov-21 00:56 UTC

head link

[zfs-discuss] CIFS shares being lost

Ah!

 

Here are the outputs

 

cat /var/adm/messages | grep smbd
Nov 20 23:38:38 sta-nas-01 smbd[552]: [ID 413393 daemon.error] dyndns: failed to
get domainname
Nov 20 23:38:39 sta-nas-01 smbd[552]: [ID 413393 daemon.error] dyndns: failed to
get domainname
Nov 20 23:48:55 sta-nas-01 smbd[552]: [ID 413393 daemon.error] dyndns: failed to
get domainname
Nov 20 23:50:45 sta-nas-01 smbd[552]: [ID 413393 daemon.error] dyndns: failed to
get domainname
Nov 20 23:51:07 sta-nas-01 smbd[552]: [ID 413393 daemon.error] dyndns: failed to
get domainname


cat /var/adm/messages | grep idmapd

Nothing

 

If it helps, trying to run ''sharemgr show -vp'' locally takes
for ever.

 

I''m thinking I re-install OpenSolaris and reconfigure it but
I''m worried about my zpools and loosing data. Do I just export and
reimport after I install it again or is there more to it than that?

 

Roughly my disks are like this:

 

2x150Gb Raptor''s in mirror mode - rpool

10x1TB in raidz2 for our NAS - tank

 

tank has about 4Tb (lots of raw video files) that I can''t backup
anywhere yet. I was hoping I can just reinstall into the rpool disks again and
overwrite the data there (they are replaceable right now), would this be safe?


Cheers,

Em

 


Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 18:47:17 -0600
Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] CIFS shares being lost
From: tim at cook.ms
To: emilygrettelisnow at hotmail.com
CC: zfs-discuss at opensolaris.org




On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 6:41 PM, Emily Grettel <emilygrettelisnow at
hotmail.com> wrote:





Wow that was mighty quick Tim!
 
Sorry, I have to reboot the server. I can SSH into the box, VNC etc but no CIFS
shares are visible.
 
Here are the last few messages from /var/adm/messages

Nov 20 23:48:55 sta-nas-01 pcplusmp: [ID 805372 kern.info] pcplusmp: ide (ata)
instance 0 irq 0xe vector 0x41 ioapic 0x2 intin 0xe is bound to cpu 0
Nov 20 23:48:55 sta-nas-01 pcplusmp: [ID 805372 kern.info] pcplusmp: ide (ata)
instance 1 irq 0xf vector 0x41 ioapic 0x2 intin 0xf is bound to cpu 1
Nov 20 23:48:55 sta-nas-01 pcplusmp: [ID 805372 kern.info] pcplusmp: ide (ata)
instance 0 irq 0xe vector 0x41 ioapic 0x2 intin 0xe is bound to cpu 0
Nov 20 23:48:55 sta-nas-01 pcplusmp: [ID 805372 kern.info] pcplusmp: ide (ata)
instance 1 irq 0xf vector 0x41 ioapic 0x2 intin 0xf is bound to cpu 1
Nov 20 23:48:55 sta-nas-01 pcplusmp: [ID 805372 kern.info] pcplusmp: ide (ata)
instance 0 irq 0xe vector 0x41 ioapic 0x2 intin 0xe is bound to cpu 0
Nov 20 23:48:55 sta-nas-01 pcplusmp: [ID 805372 kern.info] pcplusmp: ide (ata)
instance 1 irq 0xf vector 0x41 ioapic 0x2 intin 0xf is bound to cpu 1
Nov 20 23:48:55 sta-nas-01 smbd[552]: [ID 413393 daemon.error] dyndns: failed to
get domainname
Nov 20 23:50:44 sta-nas-01 last message repeated 4 times
Nov 20 23:50:45 sta-nas-01 zoneadmd[2329]: [ID 702911 daemon.error] [zone
''tomcat01''] WARNING: e1000g3:1: no matching subnet found in
netmasks(4): 192.168.0.122; using default of 255.255.255.0.
Nov 20 23:50:45 sta-nas-01 smbd[552]: [ID 413393 daemon.error] dyndns: failed to
get domainname
Nov 20 23:50:46 sta-nas-01 last message repeated 2 times
Nov 20 23:51:07 sta-nas-01 smbd[552]: [ID 413393 daemon.error] dyndns: failed to
get domainname
Nov 20 23:54:58 sta-nas-01 last message repeated 7 times
Nov 21 00:12:34 sta-nas-01 in.routed[510]: [ID 464608 daemon.error] route
0.0.0.0 --> 192.168.101.100 nexthop is not directly connected
Nov 21 01:12:34 sta-nas-01 in.routed[510]: [ID 464608 daemon.error] route
0.0.0.0 --> 192.168.101.100 nexthop is not directly connected
Nov 21 02:12:34 sta-nas-01 in.routed[510]: [ID 464608 daemon.error] route
0.0.0.0 --> 192.168.101.100 nexthop is not directly connected
Nov 21 03:12:34 sta-nas-01 in.routed[510]: [ID 464608 daemon.error] route
0.0.0.0 --> 192.168.101.100 nexthop is not directly connected
Nov 21 04:17:33 sta-nas-01 in.routed[510]: [ID 464608 daemon.error] route
0.0.0.0 --> 192.168.101.100 nexthop is not directly connected
Nov 21 05:17:33 sta-nas-01 in.routed[510]: [ID 464608 daemon.error] route
0.0.0.0 --> 192.168.101.100 nexthop is not directly connected
Nov 21 06:17:33 sta-nas-01 in.routed[510]: [ID 464608 daemon.error] route
0.0.0.0 --> 192.168.101.100 nexthop is not directly connected
Nov 21 07:17:33 sta-nas-01 in.routed[510]: [ID 464608 daemon.error] route
0.0.0.0 --> 192.168.101.100 nexthop is not directly connected
Nov 21 08:17:33 sta-nas-01 in.routed[510]: [ID 464608 daemon.error] route
0.0.0.0 --> 192.168.101.100 nexthop is not directly connected
Nov 21 09:17:33 sta-nas-01 in.routed[510]: [ID 464608 daemon.error] route
0.0.0.0 --> 192.168.101.100 nexthop is not directly connected
Nov 21 10:17:33 sta-nas-01 in.routed[510]: [ID 464608 daemon.error] route
0.0.0.0 --> 192.168.101.100 nexthop is not directly connected
Nov 21 11:17:33 sta-nas-01 in.routed[510]: [ID 464608 daemon.error] route
0.0.0.0 --> 192.168.101.100 nexthop is not directly connected

Does that help? I setup a zone to run tomcat on the same box and we also have a
VirtualBox image of Windows 2003 which is used to synchronise our backups with
another server (remotely) using Acronis.
 
Thanks,
Em



Nope.  Typically errors with cifs (assuming you''re using the native
cifs implementation) will show up as errors with smbd or idmapd.  For instance,
when my clock was off, I had the following:

Nov 10 18:08:35 fserv smbd[1063]: [ID 521964 daemon.error] k5_kinit: getting
initial credentials (Clock skew too great)
Nov 10 18:08:35 fserv smbd[1063]: [ID 702911 daemon.notice] Failed to connect to
an Active Directory server.
Nov 10 18:08:35 fserv smbd[1063]: [ID 871254 daemon.error] smbd: failed joining
DOMAIN (UNSUCCESSFUL)
Nov 10 18:08:47 fserv smbd[1063]: [ID 521964 daemon.error] k5_kinit: getting
initial credentials (Clock skew too great)
Nov 10 18:08:47 fserv smbd[1063]: [ID 702911 daemon.notice] Failed to connect to
an Active Directory server.
Nov 10 18:08:47 fserv smbd[1063]: [ID 871254 daemon.error] smbd: failed joining
DOMAIN.local (UNSUCCESSFUL)
Nov 10 18:09:49 fserv smbd[1063]: [ID 521964 daemon.error] k5_kinit: getting
initial credentials (Clock skew too great)
Nov 10 18:09:49 fserv smbd[1063]: [ID 702911 daemon.notice] Failed to connect to
an Active Directory server.
Nov 10 18:09:49 fserv smbd[1063]: [ID 871254 daemon.error] smbd: failed joining
DOMAIN.local (UNSUCCESSFUL)
Nov 10 19:12:59 fserv idmapd[367]: [ID 558913 daemon.notice] AD lookup by
winname failed
Nov 10 19:12:59 fserv smbd[1138]: [ID 600500 daemon.warning] smb_pwdutil:
couldn''t obtain SID for uid=101 (-9961)
Nov 10 19:13:11 fserv smbd[1138]: [ID 266262 daemon.error] DOMAIN\user: idmap
failed
Nov 10 19:13:16 fserv last message repeated 1 time
Nov 10 19:13:33 fserv idmapd[367]: [ID 694198 daemon.notice] Configuration
changed
 
I''d suggest doing something like a (minus the ''''):
''cat /var/adm/messages | grep smbd''
''cat /var/adm/messages | grep idmapd''

-- 
--Tim
 		 	   		  
_________________________________________________________________
Want to know what your boss is paid? Check out The Great Australian Pay Check
now
http://clk.atdmt.com/NMN/go/157639755/direct/01/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/zfs-discuss/attachments/20091121/a30097df/attachment.html>

Tim Cook

2009-Nov-21 01:02 UTC

head link

[zfs-discuss] CIFS shares being lost

On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 6:56 PM, Emily Grettel <
emilygrettelisnow at hotmail.com> wrote:
>  Ah!
>
> Here are the outputs
>
>
> *cat /var/adm/messages | grep smbd*
> Nov 20 23:38:38 sta-nas-01 smbd[552]: [ID 413393 daemon.error] dyndns:
> failed to get domainname
> Nov 20 23:38:39 sta-nas-01 smbd[552]: [ID 413393 daemon.error] dyndns:
> failed to get domainname
>
> Nov 20 23:48:55 sta-nas-01 smbd[552]: [ID 413393 daemon.error] dyndns:
> failed to get domainname
> Nov 20 23:50:45 sta-nas-01 smbd[552]: [ID 413393 daemon.error] dyndns:
> failed to get domainname
> Nov 20 23:51:07 sta-nas-01 smbd[552]: [ID 413393 daemon.error] dyndns:
> failed to get domainname
>
>
> *cat /var/adm/messages | grep idmapd*
> Nothing
>
> If it helps, trying to run ''*sharemgr show -vp*'' locally
takes for ever.
>
> I''m thinking I re-install OpenSolaris and reconfigure it but
I''m worried
> about my zpools and loosing data. Do I just export and reimport after I
> install it again or is there more to it than that?
>
> Roughly my disks are like this:
>
> 2x150Gb Raptor''s in mirror mode - rpool
> 10x1TB in raidz2 for our NAS - tank
>
> tank has about 4Tb (lots of raw video files) that I can''t backup
anywhere
> yet. I was hoping I can just reinstall into the rpool disks again and
> overwrite the data there (they are replaceable right now), would this be
> safe?
>
> Cheers,
> Em
>
>My novice opinion is that your dyndns client is broken, and affecting smbd.
If the system is confused as to what the domain is, I''d imagine that
would
cause lots of stuff to become sluggish/broken.

-- 
--Tim
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/zfs-discuss/attachments/20091120/f7584398/attachment.html>

Eric D. Mudama

2009-Nov-21 01:14 UTC

head link

[zfs-discuss] CIFS shares being lost

On Sat, Nov 21 at 11:41, Emily Grettel wrote:>
> Wow that was mighty quick Tim!
>
> Sorry, I have to reboot the server. I can SSH into the box, VNC etc
> but no CIFS shares are visible.
I found 2009.06 to be unusable for CIFS due to hangs that weren''t
resolved until b114/b116.  We had to revert to 2008.11, as any access
by a Win7 client was crashing our CIFS server within 5-10 seconds.

These were the suspected culprits:

http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/indiana-discuss/2009-June/015711.html

though I think there was another issue in b114 that wasn''t resolved
until b116.

Unfortunately, the zpool default version in 2009.06 is 1 iteration
ahead of the one in 2008.11, so there''s no smooth downgrade if you
created your zpools with a 2009.06 image.  We had started with 2008.11
and not updated our zpool, so a re-install of 2008.11 worked.

The latest dev branch (b126-or-thereabouts, 2010.02 preview) is
reportedly good for CIFS based on traffic from this list.

--eric

-- 
Eric D. Mudama
edmudama at mail.bounceswoosh.org

Emily Grettel

2009-Nov-21 01:26 UTC

head link

[zfs-discuss] CIFS shares being lost

Aha! that makes perfect sense looking at the logs :-) However there is no
ddclient on this box so I''m a bit lost as to whats going on. There are
no NT Domains either - its basically a test lab. People just use a standard
opensolaris account we''ve setup (for now!) and upload stuff to the NAS.

 

Cheers,

Em
 


Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 19:02:30 -0600
Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] CIFS shares being lost
From: tim at cook.ms
To: emilygrettelisnow at hotmail.com
CC: zfs-discuss at opensolaris.org



 
My novice opinion is that your dyndns client is broken, and affecting smbd.  If
the system is confused as to what the domain is, I''d imagine that would
cause lots of stuff to become sluggish/broken.

-- 
--Tim
 		 	   		  
_________________________________________________________________
Looking for a date? View photos of singles in your area!
http://clk.atdmt.com/NMN/go/150855801/direct/01/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/zfs-discuss/attachments/20091121/14d4ee1c/attachment.html>

Emily Grettel

2009-Nov-21 01:30 UTC

head link

[zfs-discuss] CIFS shares being lost

> by a Win7 client was crashing our CIFS server within 5-10 seconds. 

Hmmm thats probably it then. Most of our users have been using Windows 7 and
people put their machines on standby when they leave the office for the day.
Maybe this is why we''ve had issues and having to restart on a daily
basis. It works fine during the day with no downtime.

 

Is it safe to update to the latest dev version? I know it creates a BE and we
can revert to 2009.06 later but is there a way of just updating ZFS instead of
downloading 800Mb more and updating the entire OS?

 

Cheers,

Em


 > Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 18:14:06 -0700
> From: edmudama at bounceswoosh.org
> To: emilygrettelisnow at hotmail.com
> CC: zfs-discuss at opensolaris.org
> Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] CIFS shares being lost
> 
> On Sat, Nov 21 at 11:41, Emily Grettel wrote:
> >
> > Wow that was mighty quick Tim!
> >
> > Sorry, I have to reboot the server. I can SSH into the box, VNC etc
> > but no CIFS shares are visible.
> 
> I found 2009.06 to be unusable for CIFS due to hangs that weren''t
> resolved until b114/b116. We had to revert to 2008.11, as any access
> by a Win7 client was crashing our CIFS server within 5-10 seconds.
> 
> These were the suspected culprits:
> 
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/indiana-discuss/2009-June/015711.html
> 
> though I think there was another issue in b114 that wasn''t
resolved
> until b116.
> 
> Unfortunately, the zpool default version in 2009.06 is 1 iteration
> ahead of the one in 2008.11, so there''s no smooth downgrade if you
> created your zpools with a 2009.06 image. We had started with 2008.11
> and not updated our zpool, so a re-install of 2008.11 worked.
> 
> The latest dev branch (b126-or-thereabouts, 2010.02 preview) is
> reportedly good for CIFS based on traffic from this list.
> 
> --eric
> 
> -- 
> Eric D. Mudama
> edmudama at mail.bounceswoosh.org
>  		 	   		  
_________________________________________________________________
Want to know what your boss is paid? Check out The Great Australian Pay Check
now
http://clk.atdmt.com/NMN/go/157639755/direct/01/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/zfs-discuss/attachments/20091121/470bc76b/attachment.html>

Emily Grettel

2009-Nov-21 01:55 UTC

head link

[zfs-discuss] CIFS shares being lost

Well I took the plunge updating to the latest dev version. (snv_127) and I
don''t seem to be able to remotely login via ssh via putty:

 

Using username "emilytg".
Authenticating with public key "dsa-pub" from agent
Server refused to allocate pty
Sun Microsystems Inc.   SunOS 5.11      snv_127 November 2008

 

Not good :(

 

Cheers,

Em
 


From: emilygrettelisnow at hotmail.com
To: zfs-discuss at opensolaris.org
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 12:30:45 +1100
Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] CIFS shares being lost


> by a Win7 client was crashing our CIFS server within 5-10 seconds.  Hmmm thats probably it then. Most of our users have been using Windows 7 and
people put their machines on standby when they leave the office for the day.
Maybe this is why we''ve had issues and having to restart on a daily
basis. It works fine during the day with no downtime.
 
Is it safe to update to the latest dev version? I know it creates a BE and we
can revert to 2009.06 later but is there a way of just updating ZFS instead of
downloading 800Mb more and updating the entire OS?
 
Cheers,
Em

 > Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 18:14:06 -0700
> From: edmudama at bounceswoosh.org
> To: emilygrettelisnow at hotmail.com
> CC: zfs-discuss at opensolaris.org
> Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] CIFS shares being lost
> 
> On Sat, Nov 21 at 11:41, Emily Grettel wrote:
> >
> > Wow that was mighty quick Tim!
> >
> > Sorry, I have to reboot the server. I can SSH into the box, VNC etc
> > but no CIFS shares are visible.
> 
> I found 2009.06 to be unusable for CIFS due to hangs that weren''t
> resolved until b114/b116. We had to revert to 2008.11, as any access
> by a Win7 client was crashing our CIFS server within 5-10 seconds.
> 
> These were the suspected culprits:
> 
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/indiana-discuss/2009-June/015711.html
> 
> though I think there was another issue in b114 that wasn''t
resolved
> until b116.
> 
> Unfortunately, the zpool default version in 2009.06 is 1 iteration
> ahead of the one in 2008.11, so there''s no smooth downgrade if you
> created your zpools with a 2009.06 image. We had started with 2008.11
> and not updated our zpool, so a re-install of 2008.11 worked.
> 
> The latest dev branch (b126-or-thereabouts, 2010.02 preview) is
> reportedly good for CIFS based on traffic from this list.
> 
> --eric
> 
> -- 
> Eric D. Mudama
> edmudama at mail.bounceswoosh.org
> 


Check out The Great Australian Pay Check now Want to know what your boss is
paid?
_________________________________________________________________
Looking for a date? View photos of singles in your area!
http://clk.atdmt.com/NMN/go/150855801/direct/01/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/zfs-discuss/attachments/20091121/a4b95d0b/attachment.html>

Tim Cook

2009-Nov-21 03:54 UTC

head link

[zfs-discuss] CIFS shares being lost

On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 7:55 PM, Emily Grettel <
emilygrettelisnow at hotmail.com> wrote:
>  Well I took the plunge updating to the latest dev version. (snv_127) and I
> don''t seem to be able to remotely login via ssh via putty:
>
> Using username "emilytg".
> Authenticating with public key "dsa-pub" from agent
> Server refused to allocate pty
> Sun Microsystems Inc.   SunOS 5.11      snv_127 November 2008
>
> Not good :(
>
> Cheers,
> Em
>
> ------------------------------
> From: emilygrettelisnow at hotmail.com
> To: zfs-discuss at opensolaris.org
> Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 12:30:45 +1100
> Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] CIFS shares being lost
>
> > by a Win7 client was crashing our CIFS server within 5-10 seconds.
> Hmmm thats probably it then. Most of our users have been using Windows 7
> and people put their machines on standby when they leave the office for the
> day. Maybe this is why we''ve had issues and having to restart on a
daily
> basis. It works fine during the day with no downtime.
>
> Is it safe to update to the latest dev version? I know it creates a BE and
> we can revert to 2009.06 later but is there a way of just updating ZFS
> instead of downloading 800Mb more and updating the entire OS?
>
> Cheers,
> Em
>
>
>
We''d need to know what the console output was to help.  If you have
console
access can you login locally?

-- 
--Tim
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/zfs-discuss/attachments/20091120/e99e949c/attachment.html>

Mike Gerdts

2009-Nov-21 04:06 UTC

head link

[zfs-discuss] CIFS shares being lost

On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 7:55 PM, Emily Grettel
<emilygrettelisnow at hotmail.com> wrote:> Well I took the plunge updating to the latest?dev version. (snv_127) and I
> don''t seem to be able to remotely login?via ssh via putty:
>
> Using username "emilytg".
> Authenticating with public key "dsa-pub" from agent
> Server refused to allocate pty
> Sun Microsystems Inc.?? SunOS 5.11????? snv_127 November 2008
This looks like...

http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=12380

But that was supposed to be fixed in snv_126.  Can you check
/etc/minor_perm for this entry:

clone:ptmx 0666 root sys

Mike
>
> Not good :(
>
> Cheers,
> Em
>
> ________________________________
> From: emilygrettelisnow at hotmail.com
> To: zfs-discuss at opensolaris.org
> Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 12:30:45 +1100
> Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] CIFS shares being lost
>
>> by a Win7 client was crashing our CIFS server within 5-10 seconds.
> Hmmm thats probably it then. Most of our users have been using Windows 7
and
> people put their machines on standby when they leave the office for the
day.
> Maybe this is why we''ve had issues and having to restart on a
daily basis.
> It works fine during the day with no downtime.
>
> Is it safe to update to the latest dev version? I know it creates a BE and
> we can revert to 2009.06 later but is there a way of just updating ZFS
> instead of downloading 800Mb more and updating the entire OS?
>
> Cheers,
> Em
>
>
>> Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 18:14:06 -0700
>> From: edmudama at bounceswoosh.org
>> To: emilygrettelisnow at hotmail.com
>> CC: zfs-discuss at opensolaris.org
>> Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] CIFS shares being lost
>>
>> On Sat, Nov 21 at 11:41, Emily Grettel wrote:
>> >
>> > Wow that was mighty quick Tim!
>> >
>> > Sorry, I have to reboot the server. I can SSH into the box, VNC
etc
>> > but no CIFS shares are visible.
>>
>> I found 2009.06 to be unusable for CIFS due to hangs that
weren''t
>> resolved until b114/b116. We had to revert to 2008.11, as any access
>> by a Win7 client was crashing our CIFS server within 5-10 seconds.
>>
>> These were the suspected culprits:
>>
>>
>>
http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/indiana-discuss/2009-June/015711.html
>>
>> though I think there was another issue in b114 that wasn''t
resolved
>> until b116.
>>
>> Unfortunately, the zpool default version in 2009.06 is 1 iteration
>> ahead of the one in 2008.11, so there''s no smooth downgrade if
you
>> created your zpools with a 2009.06 image. We had started with 2008.11
>> and not updated our zpool, so a re-install of 2008.11 worked.
>>
>> The latest dev branch (b126-or-thereabouts, 2010.02 preview) is
>> reportedly good for CIFS based on traffic from this list.
>>
>> --eric
>>
>> --
>> Eric D. Mudama
>> edmudama at mail.bounceswoosh.org
>>
>
> ________________________________
> Check out The Great Australian Pay Check now Want to know what your boss is
> paid?
> ________________________________
> View photos of singles in your area! Looking for a date?
> _______________________________________________
> zfs-discuss mailing list
> zfs-discuss at opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
>
>


-- 
Mike Gerdts
http://mgerdts.blogspot.com/

Emily Grettel

2009-Nov-21 04:44 UTC

head link

[zfs-discuss] CIFS shares being lost

Thanks Mike, this fixed it.

 

I''ll stick with this version and see if the CIFS problems continue.

 

Thanks a lot for everyones assistance.


Cheers,

Em
 
> Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 22:06:15 -0600
> Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] CIFS shares being lost
> From: mgerdts at gmail.com
> To: emilygrettelisnow at hotmail.com
> CC: zfs-discuss at opensolaris.org
> 
> This looks like...
> 
> http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=12380
> 
> But that was supposed to be fixed in snv_126. Can you check
> /etc/minor_perm for this entry:
> 
> clone:ptmx 0666 root sys
> 
> Mike
>  		 	   		  
_________________________________________________________________
Looking to move this spring? With all the lastest places, searching has never
been easier. Look now!
http://clk.atdmt.com/NMN/go/157631292/direct/01/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/zfs-discuss/attachments/20091121/68d46c0a/attachment.html>

Eric D. Mudama

2009-Nov-21 06:46 UTC

head link

[zfs-discuss] CIFS shares being lost

On Sat, Nov 21 at 15:44, Emily Grettel wrote:>
>Thanks Mike, this fixed it.
>
>I''ll stick with this version and see if the CIFS problems continue.
>
>Thanks a lot for everyones assistance.
>
>Cheers,
>Em
Out of curiosity, do any of your users have problems seeing files on
CIFS shares from within cmd.exe?  Our win7 boxes talking to a 2008.11
CIFS server cannot list any files through cmd.exe, but they can see
files just fine through explorer.  CMD.EXE has no problem changing
directories, or executing programs against the files, we just can''t
list them.

It''s wierd.  Files also list just fine in powershell.

-- 
Eric D. Mudama
edmudama at mail.bounceswoosh.org

Emily Grettel

2009-Nov-21 22:38 UTC

head link

[zfs-discuss] CIFS shares being lost

Eric,
 
Good question, I will try this out tomorrow when I''m back at work but I
do recall using cmd to navigate through some batch files when i was on the
vanilla 2009.06 previously - as well as powershell which worked fine.
 
I will confirm.
Em
 > Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 23:46:52 -0700
> From: edmudama at bounceswoosh.org
> To: emilygrettelisnow at hotmail.com
> CC: zfs-discuss at opensolaris.org
> Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] CIFS shares being lost
> 
> On Sat, Nov 21 at 15:44, Emily Grettel wrote:
> >
> >Thanks Mike, this fixed it.
> >
> >I''ll stick with this version and see if the CIFS problems
continue.
> >
> >Thanks a lot for everyones assistance.
> >
> >Cheers,
> >Em
> 
> Out of curiosity, do any of your users have problems seeing files on
> CIFS shares from within cmd.exe? Our win7 boxes talking to a 2008.11
> CIFS server cannot list any files through cmd.exe, but they can see
> files just fine through explorer. CMD.EXE has no problem changing
> directories, or executing programs against the files, we just
can''t
> list them.
> 
> It''s wierd. Files also list just fine in powershell.
> 
> -- 
> Eric D. Mudama
> edmudama at mail.bounceswoosh.org
>  		 	   		  
_________________________________________________________________
Looking to move this spring? With all the lastest places, searching has never
been easier. Look now!
http://clk.atdmt.com/NMN/go/157631292/direct/01/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/zfs-discuss/attachments/20091122/c4ceaeb8/attachment.html>

zfs discuss - Nov 2009 - CIFS shares being lost

[zfs-discuss] CIFS shares being lost

[zfs-discuss] CIFS shares being lost

[zfs-discuss] CIFS shares being lost

[zfs-discuss] CIFS shares being lost

[zfs-discuss] CIFS shares being lost

[zfs-discuss] CIFS shares being lost

[zfs-discuss] CIFS shares being lost

[zfs-discuss] CIFS shares being lost

[zfs-discuss] CIFS shares being lost

[zfs-discuss] CIFS shares being lost

[zfs-discuss] CIFS shares being lost

[zfs-discuss] CIFS shares being lost

[zfs-discuss] CIFS shares being lost

[zfs-discuss] CIFS shares being lost

[zfs-discuss] CIFS shares being lost