file descriptors consumed by printing

[Richard Sharpe]

On Sat, 1 Mar 2003, Vance Lankhaar wrote:

> What about adding a value to the printing param? -> "printing =
> disabled" 

This seems like a good way to do it. Does anyone have any objections if I 
do so?
 
> Though, I guess it would only have an effect when put in the global
> section. 
> 
> Vance Lankhaar
> 
> On Sat, 2003-03-01 at 10:19, Richard Sharpe wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > In some recent work that I was doing, I detected that Samba uses a large 
> > number of file descriptors before it even begins to do any useful work for 
> > clients. The number is something like 27-29. The number is worse if smbd 
> > is linked against any shared libs.
> > 
> > On a machine serving 1,000 clients, that means something like 27,000 file 
> > descriptors are in use across the machine, and MAXFILES needs to be 
> > increased to large values on some machines.
> > 
> > Something like 5-8 are consumed by the printing system, and a couple seem 
> > to be sockets that the master smbd has open that don't need to exist after 
> > it has forked a child etc.
> > 
> > In looking at trying to prevent initializing the print system, and thus 
> > not consuming file descriptors, if you are not using printing (and some 
> > Samba users are not), I found that there seems to be no single parameter I 
> > can key this on, at least not in Samba 2.2.x. There is the 
> > lp_disable_spoolss (disable spoolss) but that appears not to be enough, 
> > because there is still the old system.
> > 
> > Should we introduce yet another parameter? Should we modify/change the 
> > disable spoolss to something like disable printing = all | spoolss | 
> > old-style?
> > 
> > Regards
> > -----
> > Richard Sharpe, rsharpe[at]ns.aus.com, rsharpe[at]samba.org, 
> > sharpe[at]ethereal.com, http://www.richardsharpe.com
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 

-- 
Regards
-----
Richard Sharpe, rsharpe[at]ns.aus.com, rsharpe[at]samba.org, 
sharpe[at]ethereal.com, http://www.richardsharpe.com