process shared robust mutexes for tdb

Jeremy Allison jra at
Tue Dec 25 13:42:56 MST 2012

On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 07:50:22PM -0500, Ira Cooper wrote:
> Well.. we do it already (locking the vnode, in fact what you are suggesting
> is already implemented in the kernel in a sense)  For locking.tdb it'd be
> nice to stop.  But locking.tdb isn't the evil one for me.  serverid.tdb is,
> believe it or not.  (I've actually gone through with dtrace to figure that
> out...)
> I have code in need of cleanup to basically remove all locking from the
> common case from serverid.tdb.  (I have tested it, I am using it.  So it
> isn't vapor, it just needs cleaning up so others can use it ;). )
> In fact using it I've removed fcntl from the "critical paths" in my
> use-case, allowing us to scale with CPU power, and also go faster in
> general.  I'll try to turn that code in early January.  I've already sent
> out pre-review copies.  So, it is a matter of dealing with the comments
> I've gotten, so I can get it ready to go in.  (At least for 3.6.  For
> master/4.0 it may not be as needed.  For 3.6 users... it is quite nice.)

I will remind you of this in the new year :-).

Don't forget to finish it up ! :-) :-).

Happy Holidays,


More information about the samba-technical mailing list