Jeremy Allison jeremy at
Tue Apr 10 19:50:29 GMT 2001

Lyle Seaman wrote:
> jonathan bright wrote:
> > 1- how oplocks are broken before share modes are checked.
> >    (yes, i read the comment)
> Breaking the oplock may  cause the share modes to change as a side
> effect of a close by the client previously holding the oplock.  If that's
> not clear enough, ask again. hint batch oplocks.  absent this behavior
> you might never be able to get that second open through.

That's a pretty strange design though. Once a client has closed a
file it really should ensure an update on the server (IMHO).

The idea of keeping oplocks across file open/closes just "in
case" the file will be opened again is rather risky (IMHO).
This is one of the things I don't like about Windows oplocks.


Buying an operating system without source is like buying
a self-assembly Space Shuttle with no instructions.

More information about the samba-technical mailing list