Large Write_Andx messages

[Christopher R. Hertel]

Thanks, George.  Good to hear from you.

Here's something I thought I'd passed along to the list but it seems I
missed a CC.  It's a workable overview...

  http://blogs.technet.com/neilcar/articles/247903.aspx

Chris -)-----

George Colley wrote:
> I think this has been cleared up, but here is my 2 cents worth. Chaining
> writes to a Windows Server is a bad thing, they don't handle it very
> well. You could end up blue screen the server. If you are look for
> performance with Windows then 60K writes is the best you can do, if so
> one knows a better number I would love to here about it. If you are
> doing singing then you can't do CAP_LARGE_WRITEX with Windows Server.
> The CAP_LARGE_READX will continue to work.
> George
> On Oct 29, 2007, at 12:31 PM, Christopher R. Hertel wrote:
> 
>> Ah.
>>
>> Thanks for clarifying.  Jeremy understood it right...
>>
>> I have never seen WRITE_ANDX chains.  Samba is probably able to handle
>> them
>> but you would have to test.
>>
>> Note that CAP_LARGE_WRITEX does not refer to ANDX chains, but rather to
>> large writes that exceed the negotiated block size.
>>
>> Chris -)-----
>>
>> Mikael Klamra wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> I was asking about chained WRITE_ANDX messages. Windows supports large
>>> WRITE_ANDX messages when the messages contain only one block. However,
>>> I want to chain several blocks in a message (i.e., use the batching
>>> functionality of WRITE_ANDX). Windows Server 2003 seems to accept
>>> WRITE_ANDX messages containing two blocks when the total message size
>>> is up to about 4700 bytes. When the size gets larger, the server
>>> returns a non-specific error code. This usually means that the message
>>> has the wrong format or that a capability was not set. Does Samba use
>>> the batching functionality of WRITE_ANDX? The Windows client does not
>>> seem to use it.
>>>
>>> Mikael
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10/29/07, Christopher R. Hertel <crh at ubiqx.mn.org> wrote:
>>>> Jeremy Allison wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 11:20:43AM -0700, James Peach wrote:
>>>>>> The Mac OS X 10.5 client will do large reads and writes to Samba. The
>>>>>> Samba support for this works perfectly well.
>>>>> He wasn't asking about large read/writes, he was asking about
>>>>> chaining (andX) support.
>>>> Actually, he's asking about both to some extent.
>>>>
>>>> He pinged me first in reference to my book and then also the jCIFS
>>>> list.
>>>> These are interesting questions, of course, but I think the original
>>>> post
>>>> slid a bit between CAP_LARGE_WRITEX and the idea of chaining WRITE_ANDX
>>>> messages, thus the confusion.
>>>>
>>>> Chris -)-----
>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>> "Implementing CIFS - the Common Internet FileSystem"    ISBN:
>>>> 013047116X
>>>> Samba Team -- http://www.samba.org/    -)-----     Christopher R.
>>>> Hertel
>>>> jCIFS Team -- http://jcifs.samba.org/  -)-----  ubiqx development,
>>>> uninq
>>>> ubiqx Team -- http://www.ubiqx.org/    -)-----         
>>>> crh at ubiqx.mn.org
>>>> OnLineBook -- http://ubiqx.org/cifs/   -)-----            
>>>> crh at ubiqx.org
>>>>
>>
>> --"Implementing CIFS - the Common Internet FileSystem"    ISBN:
>> 013047116X
>> Samba Team -- http://www.samba.org/    -)-----     Christopher R. Hertel
>> jCIFS Team -- http://jcifs.samba.org/  -)-----  ubiqx development, uninq
>> ubiqx Team -- http://www.ubiqx.org/    -)-----          crh at ubiqx.mn.org
>> OnLineBook -- http://ubiqx.org/cifs/   -)-----             crh at ubiqx.org
> 

-- 
"Implementing CIFS - the Common Internet FileSystem" ISBN: 013047116X
Samba Team -- http://www.samba.org/     -)-----   Christopher R. Hertel
jCIFS Team -- http://jcifs.samba.org/   -)-----   ubiqx development, uninq.
ubiqx Team -- http://www.ubiqx.org/     -)-----   crh at ubiqx.mn.org
OnLineBook -- http://ubiqx.org/cifs/    -)-----   crh at ubiqx.org