socket options

[Andrew Bartlett]

On Fri, 2013-02-01 at 13:12 -0500, Scott Lovenberg wrote:
> On 2/1/2013 1:01 PM, Ira Cooper wrote:
> > I never denied you can shoot yourself in the foot with them.
> >
> > deprecated == going to remove at some point.
> >
> > If you have a proposed doc update with a warning about changing them, and
> > their potential to have a massive negative impact on performance.  That
> > sounds quite reasonable.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > -Ira
> >
> >
> I'm in favor of using wording something like what is used for "kernel 
> oplocks" or one of the oplocks settings.  It basically says in the man 
> page, "don't touch this unless you're sure you know what you're doing".  
> Of course, everyone _always_ knows that they know what they're doing, so 
> the effect may be somewhat limited.
> 
> There are still many guides out there that say to set socket options 
> that these days would basically cripple your TCP/IP stack on Linux (and 
> probably most other *NIXes).  People that like to "tune" will blindly 
> drop these settings into their smb.conf regardless if the man page had a 
> huge skull and cross bones with a mushroom cloud next to the option.

Would you like to write a patch to at least improve the warnings in 'man
smb.conf'?  Probably not ascii-art, but some clear text explaining why
this should be the last, not first resort, particularly on Linux.

Thanks,

Andrew Bartlett

-- 
Andrew Bartlett                                http://samba.org/~abartlet/
Authentication Developer, Samba Team           http://samba.org