smbclient disk space on volumes larger than 1 TB

Luk Claes luk at
Mon Jun 6 11:34:18 MDT 2011

On 06/06/2011 10:01 AM, Volker Lendecke wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 05, 2011 at 08:35:39PM +0200, Guntram Blohm wrote:
>> Sorry for the long delay. Turned out things are never as easy as
>> they seem. The vanilla smbclient works great against a samba server,
>> but NetApp servers don't behave well. Unfortunately, i don't have a
>> true windows share that is larger than 1 TB to test against.
> Another one where NetApp does not implement certain
> infolevels or ways to do things that both Windows and Samba
> servers do. My experience with NetApp has been that anything
> not in their support matrix is really not supported. "Not
> supported" as in "yes, it is indeed broken and we won't fix
> it". Unfortunately to me it seems that any Linux client, be
> it smbclient, be it cifsfs, is not in their client matrix.
> So installations who have non-Windows clients should be very
> cautious to install NetApp.
> One hickup I've seen at a customer site was Tunderbird
> running over cifsfs destroyed mailboxes because NetApp does
> not support the way cifsfs uses to truncate files. Windows
> does it, Samba does it, but NetApp does not.
> Another one was where Linux cifsfs tried to enumerate EAs
> and NetApp sent 39 bytes of garbage. 39 bytes is a typical
> length for an error SMB packet, so we have triggered
> *something* on the NetApp side, but the output seemed to be
> random, uninitialized memory. cifsfs just dropped that
> packet and eventually ran into a timeout for "ls", but
> waiting 30 seconds for every file to show up is a less than
> exciting experience.
> These two ones are a while ago, so they might be fixed in
> the meantime. But I would not count on NetApp to work
> flawlessly with non-Windows clients.

At the university we use NetApp as an NFS backend to our Samba servers
which works quite well...



More information about the samba-technical mailing list