Large Directories Timeout smbfs & Windows

Nadav Danieli nadavd at
Thu Oct 27 15:49:46 GMT 2005

On Thu, 2005-10-27 at 04:34, Jeremy Allison wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 26, 2005 at 11:16:10PM +0200, Nadav Danieli wrote:
> > Hi,
> >  
> > Had the same problem, and being short of time to test new samba version, wrote a relatively simple patch to address this problem. In case you are interested I cane send you a patch against 3.0.10 source..
> > This solves the problem with findfirst, however if you are using hash_notify you may still have a problem, and I think it is the same with the latest samba release.
> We've already fixed findfirst in the latest code. I agree
> it may cause a problem with notify_hash though.... Any
> thoughts on a good fix there ?
> Jeremy.

It didn't make things worse, but notify_hash still need to read the
whole directory, and do stats.
In my opinion notify_hash need something similar to dir_ptr which hold
the state of current dir in progress.
If directory is too large (may be time or size based) notify_hash would
pause processing and resume the main loop with zero timeout to enable
handling of new pending requests if any.
Nest time it will resume the directory in progress, or else choose one,
the same as it does now.

More information about the samba-technical mailing list