[Samba] winbind trouble under load?
J. Rönnblom
samba at skola.skelleftea.se
Tue Oct 1 15:23:01 GMT 2002
I forgot to mention that I "connect" winbind to the W2K DC not as an
anonymous
account but with a normal user account. I use the
wbinfo -A user%password
abartlet at samba.org skriver:
>testparm now (2.2.6pre2) has an option to only display non-default
>values. That makes it easier to figure out what you have actually
>changed...
[global]
workgroup = SKOLA
server string = Trustix Samba Server
interfaces = br0
security = DOMAIN
encrypt passwords = Yes
password server = *
log level = 0
log file = /var/log/samba/log.%I
name resolve order = wins host lmhosts bcast
socket options = TCP_NODELAY SO_RCVBUF=8192 SO_SNDBUF=8192
load printers = No
os level = 32
preferred master = True
domain master = False
wins server = 193.180.x.y
winbind uid = 10000-40000
winbind gid = 10000-40000
template homedir = /dev/null
winbind enum users = No
winbind enum groups = No
printer admin = @"SKOLA\Support",@"SKOLA\Administrators"
>
>I would avoid the exec on open, just becouse I see Win2k doing a *lot*
>of tree connects/disconnects. I would instead suggest using
>pam_mkhomdir (or a modified varient) becouse they occour per session,
>not per tree.
It is only for testing so I don't give much about speed now, on to get it
working. I'll look into the pam_mkhomedir later.
>
>> -------------------
>>
>> Error on W2K DC
>>
>> Event Type: Error
>> Event Source: Srv
>> Event Category: None
>> Event ID: 2006
>> Date: 2002-09-30
>> Time: 12:28:58
>> User: N/A
>> Computer: DC01
>> Description:
>> The server received an incorrectly formatted request from \\193.180.x.y
>> Data:
>> 0000: 00 00 34 00 02 00 7c 00 ..4...|.
>> 0008: 00 00 00 00 d6 07 00 c0 ....Ö..À
>> 0010: 00 00 00 00 01 20 98 c0 ..... ?À
>> 0018: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ........
>> 0020: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ........
>> 0028: b3 06 00 00 ff 53 4d 42 ³...ÿSMB
>> 0030: 25 00 00 00 00 08 01 c0 %......À
>> 0038: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ........
>> 0040: 00 00 00 00 00 d0 6d 38 .....Ðm8
>> 0048: 02 50 01 00 10 00 00 48 .P.....H
>> 0050: 00 00 00 48 00 00 00 00 ...H....
>> 0058: 00 00 00 00 ....
>
>Now *this* is interesting. I've only heard of it once, and it was not
>reproducable. Can you reproduce this error, and try to get a packet
>sniff of it? I would be interested to see what it actually is.
Can't reproduce it. I have a few of these every week in my log files,
both from this server (2.2.6cvs) and the other samba servers (2.2.5).
I'll examine the logs and see if I can find anything that happend at the
same time.
>
>>
>> [2002/10/01 13:21:50, 0] smbd/sec_ctx.c:initialise_groups(244)
>> Unable to initgroups. Error was Input/output error
>>
>> The logs are full of those message. However I think the are due to
>> the fact that I have winbind enum groups = no in /etc/samba/smb.conf
>
>That should not be. That error is probably somthing else...
Yes, could it be this:
[print$]
path = /samba/printers
write list = @"SKOLA\Support" @"SKOLA\Administrators"
guest ok = Yes
root at xx-proxy /var/log/samba# testparm | grep guest
map to guest = Never
domain guest group =
guest account = nobody
guest only = No
guest ok = No
guest ok = Yes
When the computer/user tries to connect to the share as a guest it fails
since the guest account (nobody) is not allowed to use samba?
OR could the fact that im using a normal account to connect to w2k
account for the errors? (wbinfo -A user%pass)
>
>In any case, one course of action might be (assuming you are running an
>Active Directory setup) to move to Samba 3.0. If the Win2k clients get
>kerberos credentials, then Samba doesn't need to contact the DC at all
>for authenticaion. (It might need to contact it for other things
>however, but these can be cached too) Also, Samba 3.0 uses an LDAP
>client on AD, which I suspect will cope much better with 10000 users.
>
>Samba 3.0 also has a 'dual deamon' mode where it can opearate out of
>it's cache while waiting for new answers from the DC, which might help
>avoid a blocking winbind call backloging the entire system.
>
>Finally, Samba 3.0 has *much* better error reporting, so you might get a
>meaningful error message too!
But isn't samba 3.0 in alpha or beta? Is it really recommended/safe to run
it in production?
More information about the samba
mailing list