John E. Malmberg
wb8tyw at qsl.net
Thu Oct 12 03:36:36 GMT 2000
"Ulf Bertilsson" <ulf.bertilsson#adcomdata.no> wrote:
> > > Should Samba support this for best possible
> > >performance ?
> > The performance hit I am observing from these
> > failed lookups is trivial compared to other issues
> > inside of the SMBD that I am seeing.
> It could be that mine "None Posix platform os"
> is having great overhead due to this.
My target platform, OpenVMS is somewhat Posix compliant, but not enough to
build SAMBA with out some help to the runtime library. This help does
include some overhead.
> > I have not looked at the code base later than 2.0.6,
> > but there appear to be other performance
> > enhancements that should be both easier to
> > do, and yield far better results.
> Cool, anything that comes to your head first ?
I am seeing on the debug traces a lot of what appear to be redundant
translations from dos filenames to unix ones. And then I have to add a
translation to VMS one before using the file.
Most of these seem to end up calling the stat() function.
Both the filename translations and the stat() function have high overhead
for me. Especially the stat() function.
When I look at the source code, I can not find where this is happening.
There is a macro that is supposed to short circuit some of these calls to
stat(), so maybe the logic inside of it is not working for OpenVMS for some
I will be using some profiling tools after I get up to the current version
of SAMBA, until then I am aiming for functional compatability.
wb8tyw at qsl.network
More information about the samba-technical