[Samba] CTDB / Samba / GFS2 - Performance - with Picture Link

[Volker Lendecke]

On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 09:16:34PM +0000, Vogel, Sven wrote:
> Hi Volker,
> 
> you wrote that ist not so good to set locking = no, why ist hat so?

SMB semantics require mandatory locking. If a lock is set,
read/write on that region will fail. Applications do depend
on this. With locking=no you don't do that.

> i thought 
> 
> ctdb (locking)--> dlm_controld (locking) or gfs_controld (locking)
> 
> so when i disable locking in samba i dont know how will
> this presented to the cluster file system? I thought the
> cluster file system will use the locks like this below.
> 
> Ctdb(locking=no) --> gfs2 (locking)

The mapping to GFS is completely controlled by "posix
locking". ctdb has no business in that, it is only
responsible for Samba-internal databases.

Volker

-- 
SerNet GmbH, Bahnhofsallee 1b, 37081 Göttingen
phone: +49-551-370000-0, fax: +49-551-370000-9
AG Göttingen, HRB 2816, GF: Dr. Johannes Loxen
http://www.sernet.de, mailto:kontakt at sernet.de