printing, locking, etc in 2.2.0
dm at belkam.com
Mon May 21 15:42:05 GMT 2001
----- Original Message -----
From: Neil Hoggarth <neil.hoggarth at physiol.ox.ac.uk>
To: <jeremy at valinux.com>; <samba-technical at samba.org>
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2001 6:28 PM
Subject: Re: printing, locking, etc in 2.2.0
> On Fri, 11 May 2001 12:43:08 -0400 Jeremy Allison <jeremy at valinux.com>
> > We don't use lock files. These may be dead entries in the
> > lock database, but these will get deleted once other smbds
> > notice the pids are dead.
> > I'll review the code though just to be sure.
> Hi Jeremy
> Did you ever get around to this review? I'm seeing a "phantom" lock,
> owned by an smbd process that bailed out several hours ago, and it
> doesn't appear that the remaining smbds are going going to break it or
> clear it up of its own accord.
> I'm running 2.2 CVS, checked out yesterday afternoon, on Solaris 2.6.
> The smbd process that bailed out with the following log messages:
> [2001/05/21 11:44:28, 0, pid=29514] lib/util_sock.c:write_socket_data(542)
> write_socket_data: write failure. Error = Broken pipe
> [2001/05/21 11:44:28, 0, pid=29514] util_sock.c:write_socket(566)
> Error writing 989 bytes to socket 4: ERRNO = Broken pipe
> [2001/05/21 11:44:28, 0, pid=29514] util_sock.c:send_smb(753)
> Error writing 989 bytes to client. -1. Exiting
> It looks like the client went away unexpectedly, and smbd decided to
And I want to add that this tries to smbd commubication slow system down.
When I had such problem I have to wait about 10 minutes to open printer
> Is there any way to manually delete an entry from the locking database?
I want to say again that such tool wil be usefull in any case, even if this
bug will gone ;))
Wire connection and Windows reinstallation senior engineer
2:5050/11.23 at fidonet
More information about the samba-technical