Fcntl hangs in 2.2.5 on Solaris

[jra at dp.samba.org]

On Fri, Aug 09, 2002 at 08:16:11AM -0400, David Collier-Brown wrote:
> 
> 	In the meantime, we're trying building an smbd with 
> 	spinlocks. Jeremy has cautioned us that This May Be Bad (;-))

Indeed :-).

> 	So, let me ask some spinlock question: 
> 	1) I know that if one process goes down holding a 
> 	spinlock, the lock will be non-removable. Will it be 
> 	removed if all smbds go down, and specifically if 
> 	they go down on a system crash, or are they persistent?

The tdb file containing the spinlock will need to be removed.

> 	2) if they are persistent (they appear to be part of the tdb
> 	data structure ???) can the system be brought down and then
> 	recover/delete them?

Yes. Only Samba needs to be taken down, not the system.

> 	3) will they be cleaned up if a client machine goes
> 	down and the smbd discovers this via a keepalive?

Yes, it's only the kill -9 nosave problem.

> 	If we can find a workaround with acceptable behavior,
> 	I'll recommend isolating this set of databases on a
> 	single samba, dedicated to that task and using spinlocks.
> 	This is still a workaround, but the production system
> 	is at risk both ways...

Yep - Solaris desparately needs a patch for this....

BTW: I ended up losing all email whilst I was away due to
"unforseen problems" :-(. Anyone who sent me email and didn't
get a response please resend.

Jeremy.