oplock problems with Version 2.2.2
David Collier-Brown
davecb at canada.sun.com
Tue Jan 15 09:17:03 GMT 2002
Thomas Schulz wrote:
> I installed the new Samba on Sunday. At that time all the PCs were turned
> off. When people came in this morning (Monday) they noticed that all file
> activity was very slow, with one particular user having severe problems.
> When I looked in the log file for that PC, I found the oplock errors.
Ok, a suggestion for both old and new sambas:
if people are competing with each other for
the same files, then turning oplocks off
will improve performance. If not, it will
reduce performance.
"Opportunistic locks" allow local caching
of files on the client. If someone tries to
open a cached file, they hit the lock,
discover that some other client machine
has opportunistically cached it, and send
a notification "put that file back on the
server, you!", wait for it to happen, and
only then get to open it using record locks.
If this is the way your app wants to run (i.e.,
it's has a database-like behavior) you don't
want oplocks. If your app wants to lock the
whole file, edit it and write the whole thing
back, AND if there is little competition
between users for the same file, then you
want oplocks.
Of course, you want to experiment during quiet
periods (:-))
--dave
--
David Collier-Brown, | Always do right. This will gratify
Performance & Engineering | some people and astonish the rest.
Americas Customer Engineering, | -- Mark Twain
(905) 415-2849 | davecb at canada.sun.com
More information about the samba
mailing list