[Samba] locking "issue"

[jra at dp.samba.org]

On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 12:06:02PM -0500, Tony Lay wrote:
> Dear list,
> 
> I personally think this is a non-issue, but I may be incorrect.  If it is a
> non issue I need to find a way to get some communication going on making it
> evident to the devlopers of a software program.
> 
> I have strict locking = YES (which is by default set to NO) set
> and I have been repeatedly told that there is a locking issue within SAMBA.
> I don't believe this is the case as we are pushed towards a propriatary
> client.
> 
> Basically it boils down to this...
> 
> 1.) Samba has been stable...no/few issues
> 2.) Locking is set to strict...shouldn't have the issues that COMPANY X and
> COMPANY Y had right?
> 3.)Why do I want to pay thousands of dollars because COMPANY X and COMPANY Y
> couldn't figure out that locking should be set.
> 
> Now what I'm asking if:
> A.) Is this locking issue is indeed resolved by me setting this lock?
> B.) Even if that setting resolves said issue or not - what can I do to get
> some communication open for testing so we don't have to purchase X product
> because of a simple fix or setting change.  I'd be more than happy to get
> ahold of some developers at this place to get some kind of a dialog set up.
> It _should_ be in their best intrest to get interoprability going with samba
> as we aren't the only customer running it with thier products.
> 
> The following message is from a developer at the software company...

Yes, I'm happy to have a dialog with the engineer at the relevent
company to help them get Samba on their "officially supported" list.

They seem to not understand that Samba has interoperability with
NFS locks so long as the oplocks are disabled (or you're running
Linux or IRIX as a server platform).

If you'd like to pass my email address to the person I'd be happy
to have a conference call/email dialog with them to explain how
Samba works (we pass 100% Windows client locking tests, even more
than a Windows NT SP6a server will pass, as we don't have the same
locking bugs :-).

Thanks,

	Jeremy.