smbwall

[David Lee]

On Fri, 25 Jan 2002, Torsten Curdt wrote:

> [...]
> Me, too!! So we are 3 ;) I have been using such a script, too.
> Unfortunately I had to  throw it away because the smbclient was much too
> slow when sending a pop-up message to W2k machines. We are now running a
> 2.2alpha0 snapshot (and are about to upgrade) and it was still slow - no
> matter what W2k version without any SP, SP1 ,SP2. Is it faster now?

As it stands, the "smbclient" (at least at 2.2.1a) does, indeed suffer
these long delays of several seconds when interacting with a W2K client.

The sort of activity we are discussing is pushing "smbclient" outside what
it was originally designed for.  So it would be unfair to attach "blame" 
to it: it's fine for what it was. 

The problem for our projected use it that the subroutine in the library it
uses sends a message and then waits for its reply.  Fine, in its context,
and with the advantage of simplicity).  But what is needed for our context
is an _asynchronous_ means of getting the response.

For my trial smbd/WinPopp, this was actually quite easy to do: basically
recoding that subroutine simply to send the message, and having the
response gathered in the main "select()" in the smbd's main process loop.

(Of course, my recoding also allowed "smbclient" still to be linked to
that library and still work!)

Hope that helps. 

-- 

:  David Lee                                I.T. Service          :
:  Systems Programmer                       Computer Centre       :
:                                           University of Durham  :
:  http://www.dur.ac.uk/t.d.lee/            South Road            :
:                                           Durham                :
:  Phone: +44 191 374 2882                  U.K.                  :