Samba 2.2.1a On Dual Xeon 866 (1Gb RAM) RedHat Linux 7.1 Server (800users 300Gb of data)

Peter Hübschen pehu at
Tue Oct 16 00:51:07 GMT 2001


this __alloc_pages error is a kernel error, if you use the Highmem
option from the kernel. There were some problems with the Virtual Memory
System. It's a known issue and with kernel 2.4.12 this should not happen
anymore (completely new VM-Code).

Hope that helps

Daniel Van Wieren schrieb:

> Hi, We currently run a Sun E3000, Solaris 2.6, 2Gb RAM, 3x250MHz CPU,
> 800 users and 300Gb of data. This runs fine. However, we decided to
> migrate to a Linux based system as above and this has failed
> miserably. Executables are very slow to run from Win9x clients and can
> be forced to complete execution by kill -9 on the process from Unix,
> but are OK from WinNT/2K. However, an NFS share of the same Samba
> share is absolutely OK when connected via NFS to our Solaris server
> and then reshared via Samba 2.0.6. It appears to be related to 16-bit
> files which do not display an icon in a Windows Explorer view.
> However, we were not able to replicate this problem using Samba 2.2.1a
> on another RedHat 7.1 server we use as a Samba/LPRng print server. On
> our E3000 we normally have between 600 and 800 smbd processes running.
> When we went live on our Linux server these were up to 2000 (and
> growing) with a load average of 171 (and growing) and kernel CPU usage
> at 90%+ before we bailed out and went back to our E3000. The following
> error was recorded at the height of the problem: Oct 15 09:06:59 hydra
> kernel: __alloc_pages: 1-order allocation failed.
> Oct 15 09:06:59 hydra kernel: __alloc_pages: 1-order allocation
> failed.
> Oct 15 09:06:59 hydra kernel: __alloc_pages: 1-order allocation
> failed.
> Oct 15 09:07:00 hydra kernel: __alloc_pages: 1-order allocation
> failed. It is clear that there may be some tweaks we need to make to
> the Samba config. If there is a configuration that you would suggest
> for our set-up then please advise. I am happy to provide any
> additional information or config details. However, if I should seek
> assistance in a different forum please point me in the right
> direction. It is surprisingly difficult to find information on anyone
> who runs a Samba implementation of this size which I wouldn't have
> thought was that unusual. If we are unable to resolve the difficulties
> then we will be compelled to replace our Linux/Samba file-server
> environment with a Win2K solution due to time constraints for getting
> a new system in place to replace the Solaris solution. Kind
> Regards,========================
> Daniel Van Wieren
> IST Infrastructure Team
> Tait Electronics Ltd
> Christchurch
> Ph 64-3-3570763

More information about the samba mailing list