Regarding Bug 3204 - winbindd: Exceeding 200 client connections, no idle connection found

[Clement Wong]

Does anyone know what windows timeout time is?

Clement

> On 19 Jul 2014, at 03:09, Jeremy Allison <jra at samba.org> wrote:
> 
>> On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 02:24:24PM -0700, Hemanth Thummala wrote:
>> Hi All,
>> 
>> Recently we hit this issue twice at out customer site whose is running
>> samba 3.6.12+ stack. Increasing the "winbind max clients" to 400 also did
>> not help.
>> 
>> [2014/07/17 11:23:02.223054,  0]
>> winbindd/winbindd.c:947(winbindd_listen_fde_handler)
>>  winbindd: Exceeding 400 client connections, no idle connection found
>> [2014/07/17 11:23:02.224055,  0]
>> winbindd/winbindd.c:947(winbindd_listen_fde_handler)
>>  winbindd: Exceeding 400 client connections, no idle connection found
>> 
>> Winbindd went unresponsive and found that there are lot(>10K) of open file
>> handles for stuck winbindd process. Had to restart winbindd to restore the
>> user activities.
>> 
>> ....
>> ....
>> 3378 winbindd         10294 s - rw------   1       0 UDS
>> /usr/local/var/locks/winbindd_privileged/pipe
>> 3378 winbindd         10295 s - rw------   1       0 UDS
>> /usr/local/var/locks/winbindd_privileged/pipe
>> 3378 winbindd         *10296* s - rw------   1       0 UDS
>> /usr/local/var/locks/winbindd_privileged/pipe
>> 
>> Gdb stack of stuck winbindd process is updated in the bug.
>> 
>> I have seen few people have reported the same with post 3.3 stacks. Would
>> like to know if someone is able to figure out the reason and fix for this
>> issue.
> 
> Ok, as this went to samba-technical here is a (test) patch
> for 3.6.x only that attempts to fix this bug.
> 
> It adds a new [global] parameter:
> 
> winbind request timeout
> 
> default value of 60 (seconds). What it does is terminate every client
> connection that has either remained idle for 60 seconds, or has not replied
> within 60 seconds. Initially I worried this was a little aggressive, but I
> don't think so - if a request has take > 60 seconds it's almost certainly dead,
> and pruning idle clients after 60 seconds is also probably ok. Also it's
> tuneable :-).
> 
> If this works for people I can forward port to 4.1.next and 4.0.next.
> 
> It's also added to the bug report.
> 
> Let me know if it helps !
> 
> Cheers,
> 
>    Jeremy.
> <look>