Stock Redhat 6.0 and Samba is not a good mix !!

norman at lithe.uark.edu norman at lithe.uark.edu
Mon Jun 14 13:42:58 GMT 1999



> Christian E wrote:
>
> > Hi,all
> >
> >         Just thought I would share this experiences with you all (so you don't
> > have to go through the same trouble as me). I've set up a Samba
> > filer-server in my company and from the start I wanted to use the new
> > redhat 6. i decided to test the sucker before implementing it by using
> > Netbench 6 from ZD. I set up the samba-server and connected 10 klients
> > for the test (100 Mbit clients) and started the test....
> >         It couldn't even complete 1/4 th of the test before Samba core- dumped
> > and in the next couple of test runs all kinds of weird stuff happened:
> > "server service not started" on the clients and no response from Samba
> > even though it seemed to be running....
> >         After having tried both Samba 2.0.4 and 2.0.3 without luck and having
> > succesfully run a test with a redhat 5.2 box I decided to try and
> > install 5.2 and repeat the test.
> >         It worked without any problems whatsoever and with even better
> > performance...I don't know if any of you have had such problems, but it
> > has confirmed my opinion about Redhat 6.0...It's a rushed release which
> > hasn't been tested thoroughly...I also spoke to H.J LU from VA and he
> > said that they'd had al sorts of problems with redhat 6....
> >         Here's my test result:
> >
> > RH ver:         Samba ver:      Kernel:         SMP:    SW-RAID:        Result:
> >
> > 6.0             2.0.4           2.2.6           Yes     Yes             Unstable
> > 6.0             2.0.3           2.2.6           Yes     Yes             Unstable
> > 5.2             2.0.3           2.0.36-0.7      Yes     No              Stable
> > 5.2             2.0.3           2.0.36-3        Yes     No              Stable
> > 5.2             2.0.3           2.2.6           Yes     No              Stable
> > 5.2             2.0.4           2.2.6           Yes     Yes             Stable
> >
> >         The last is my current setup...It's stable and performs very well....
> >
> > best regards
> >
> > Christian E
>
> I am currently using RedHat 6.0 and Samba 2.0.4b (RPM from samba.org), and we
> haven't had any problems with stability.  We are not a large office, and we don't
> get
> "alot" of traffic over the server, but there is usually something going on
> somewhere
> that the server services are used for.  Our server is using the "unofficial" PDC
> code,
> and has 3 sets of shares that is avaialable to our domain (All clients are Win NT
> 4, mix
> of SP4 and SP5).   Two of our shares even have networked apps installed on them,
> and
> they run fine.
>
> As far as RedHat 6.0 goes, our server also serves as a student HTML server, so we
> had
> over 30 telnet connections to it with people working on their HTML, plus serving
> the HTML
> code for them to read, plus I was running Netscape and Gimp and X11amp all while
> running
> Samba 2.0.4b, and never had a crash once. (PII 266 with 64 M of Ram)
>
> Our current kernel is 2.2.9, and I usually run fvwm2 or Afterstep in X mode.
>
> Question:  Do you run GNOME as a desktop while running samba?  I have noticed
> that while GNOME has some good features, it is fairly resource intensive.  I have
> quit using it and am waiting for the new release of KDE with its corba objects
> working.
>
> Of course, on the other side, I don't use SMP and RAID.
>

--

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Norman Weathers
Technology Coordinator ETS
University of Arkansas, Fayetteville

phone: (501) 575-3553 or (501) 575-4344
email: nweathe at comp.uark.edu or norman at lithe.uark.edu

"It's not that I 'prefer' to do this without an NT server.... I
just 'prefer' to do it where it will work..."
-------------------------------------------------------------------





More information about the samba-ntdom mailing list