[Samba] Exclusive oplock left by process

[eric roseme]

I don't think that "blocking locks" is your problem.

Jeremy just answered the question about releasing locks by clearing the 
lock files (tdbs), although again, I don't think it will affect your 
operation.  His reply is at:

http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=samba&m=109270256108878&w=2

Eric Roseme
Hewlett-Packard

xiaoqin_qiu at agilent.com wrote:
> Hi Eric,
> 
> Thank you for your response. I will read the white paper that you wrote.
> 
> I forgot to mention that in my smb.conf file for SAMBA 3.0.5, I have "blocking locks = no". Should I set this? Or should I use the default "blocking locks = yes"?
> 
> I also curious about if it is safe to remove all files(including locking.tdb, brlok.tdb, etc.) under /var/.../locks directory after I stop samba server?
> 
> I can see your point to disable oplocks, however, I am still wondering how this upgrade from 2.0.7 (nmbd -V showed 2.0.7, smbd -V showed 2.0.9, NOT 2.2.7) to 3.0.5 introduced oplock problem since we use the default settings for both versions of samba.
> 
> Thank you very much for your help!
> 
> Xiaoqin Qiu
> IT Infrastructure Services Organization
> Agilent Technologies, Inc.
> xiaoqin_qiu at agilent.com
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: eric roseme [mailto:eroseme at emonster.rose.hp.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2004 3:46 PM
> To: xiaoqin_qiu at agilent.com
> Cc: samba at lists.samba.org
> Subject: Re: [Samba] Exclusive oplock left by process
> 
> 
> Hi Xiaoqin,
> 
> It appears to me that "oplock break wait time = 0" is the default on 
> both 2.2 (2.2.10 for me) and 3.0 (3.0.2a for me).
> 
> Unless you have a good reason for using oplocks, I suggest turning them 
> off altogether ("oplocks = no", "level2 oplocks = no" - so testparm does 
> not complain that level2 is on when oplocks are off).  Also, if you have 
> NFS users accessing the same files that are being oplocked, you could 
> have some data integrity problems.
> 
> You can look at a whitepaper I did about oplocks at:
> 
> http://www.docs.hp.com/hpux/onlinedocs/4501/CIFS_Oplock_Guideline.pdf
> 
> Eric Roseme
> Hewlett-Packard
> 
> xiaoqin_qiu at agilent.com wrote:
> 
> 
>>Hi all,
>>
>>We have a HP-UX 11i server running as a samba server. Users use Windows 2000 boxes with Service Pack 4 to connect to the samba server. Several days ago, we upgraded samba server from 2.0.7 to 3.0.5, and we started to experience the following problem:
>>
>>The general connection and access to the samba server is ok. However, under the samba share there have been some directories mounted from some other HP-UX 11i servers through WAN. When people try to copy files from these directories or running some applications using files under these directories, the windows explorer/application kind of hang and became very slow. But this type of tasks were successful using samba version 2.0.7. The problem only happened after the upgrade.
>>
>>I looked at the samba log file and found the following errors:
>>
>>[2004/08/24 18:07:51, 0] smbd/oplock.c:request_oplock_break(1023)
>>  request_oplock_break: no response received to oplock break request to pid 27458 on port 54926 for dev = 430016a8, inode = 3310429, file_id = 24
>>[2004/08/24 18:07:51, 0] smbd/open.c:open_mode_check(680)
>>  open_mode_check: exlusive oplock left by process 27458 after break ! For file hped/sr/osclib_encode_def.atf, dev = 430016a8, inode = 3310429. Deleting it to continue...
>>[2004/08/24 18:07:51, 0] smbd/open.c:open_mode_check(684)
>>  open_mode_check: Existent process 27458 left active oplock.
>>
>>Our WAN connection is pretty fast although it is a lot slower than LAN. And in the meantime, we had no problem accessing these directories using NFS.
>>
>>I read man pages and search the internet. Although there are sevel posts on the internet describing similar problem, I havn't found any solution. >From the man page, parameter "oplock break wait time" caught my eyes. We have been using default value for both 2.0.7 and 3.0.5. However, the default value for this parameter seems getting changed from "10" to "0" (if that was not a typo). And we use default values for all oplock related parameters.
>>
>>Can I change this paramter to 10? The man page kind of made me be afraid of change this value. Will this help? And any suggestion about our problem?
>>
>>Thank you very much for your help!
>>
>>Xiaoqin Qiu
>>IT Infrastructure Services Organization
>>Agilent Technologies, Inc.
>>xiaoqin_qiu at agilent.com