Solving: samba registry with client programs
idra at samba.org
Fri Apr 20 06:47:47 MDT 2012
On Fri, 2012-04-20 at 08:16 +0200, Volker Lendecke wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 01:38:07PM -0400, simo wrote:
> > On Thu, 2012-04-19 at 07:24 +0200, Volker Lendecke wrote:
> > > On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 03:53:34PM -0400, simo wrote:
> > > > > And, I
> > > > > don't think that registry smb.conf modifications are
> > > > > so frequent that this really hurts. The fsyncs on the
> > > > > registry.tdb are probably much, much more expensive.
> > > >
> > > > True, but I was not too much concerned with performance, rather rewrite
> > > > of the file over an over, if someone wants to check changes with
> > > > something like inotify it would get multiple wakeups all over.
> > >
> > > We rewrite the registry over and over too, so I think this
> > > problem exists already today.
> > Yes and we drafted a plan to fix it by using 2 tdb files a while ago, I
> > guess we could accept the penalty now and then solve the problem at the
> > same time once we get around to fix the registry general issues.
> Sorry, I did not understand your message. Does this mean
> that you bless the smb.conf text copy of the registry that
> Stef proposed?
Yes, but I'd like an option (possibly off by default) to disable the
behavior for those installs that do not want the overhead (as little as
Samba Team GPL Compliance Officer <simo at samba.org>
Principal Software Engineer at Red Hat, Inc. <simo at redhat.com>
More information about the samba-technical