Releasing Samba 4.0 RC1 on 4 Sep 2012?

Stefan (metze) Metzmacher metze at samba.org
Thu Aug 23 13:11:05 MDT 2012


Hi Andrew,

> I agree this is a key feature, as durable handles are a major part of
> what is really special in SMB3.  
>
> Is there anything I can do to assist with this?
>
> More broadly, one of the biggest challenges for but also the biggest
> achievement of the Samba 4.0 release process is bringing our two major
> development strands together into a single release.  We have much to be
> proud of!

Indeed!

> That our synchronization on a first-suggestion date for RC1 is only off
> by a few days or a week is pretty impressive, and I'm sure we can work
> it out.   

yes :-)

> Given the feedback earlier, I think it's best that we do the RC before
> SDC.  That way, we can focus on testing what features we have, not
> adding the next major feature to this particular release. 
> 
>> If possible we should add some magic that rejects to work as AD DC in a
>> domain
>> which also has Windows DCs. As that can't work as SYSVOL replication
>> isn't supported
>> and we could also corrupt the Windows database if we send replication
>> notifications
>> while a windows dc is currently replicating from us. (We could have an
>> option to
>> allow this, but that should be off similar to the "dsdb:schema update
>> allowed"
>> option.
> 
> This is the first I've heard of this.  Can you explain more about the
> corruption you fear?

While doing migrations from samba3 to windows via samba4, it was
needed to disable (at least) the drepl service in samba4.

What happened is this you add about 5000 computers, 5000 users and 5000
groups
and about 10000 groupmemberships to the samba4 ldb
(after a vampire run, but before starting 'samba')

Then you start 'samba', as the replication of this amount of objects/links
takes some time, it's very likely that some local task in 'samba' triggers
a modification to the domain ldb file. This is picked up by our drepl task
which sends a notification to the windows dc, which is currently within
a replication cycle with our drsuapi task.

This somehow confuses the windows (at least 2008R2) dc, It cancels the
running
replication cycle and starts a new one (but with the wrong meta data!)
All objects/links which were pending in the running replication cycle
are lost
and they won't ever be replicated to the windows dc, as he believes that
they're already replicated.

I was able to reproduce this and disabling the 'drepl' task fixed it.
I used samba-tool ldapcmp to compare the servers.

>>> This is a lot of work for 2 weeks, but I want to avoid doing it in the
>>> week before SDC as that will be busy with preparation for travel.
>>
>> Maybe we should aim for September 7th? Which would mean 3 additional
>> days for me.
>> But still I can't promise that it's ready by then.
> 
> I'm happy with Sep 7 or Sep 10 (at the latest) if Karolin is happy with
> me doing the RC1.  (That close to SDC, I would prefer to just handle it
> with existing processes and scripts personally than also co-ordinate it
> with someone else). 

Let's see where we are next week.

metze

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 262 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.samba.org/pipermail/samba-technical/attachments/20120823/f7162123/attachment.pgp>


More information about the samba-technical mailing list