[Samba] samba3 upgrade misery

[Curtis Maloney]

Felipe Augusto van de Wiel wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
> 
> Curtis Maloney wrote, On 15-08-2007 21:07:
>> Greetings, all
> 
> Hey Curtis,

Hi... thanks for responding.
> 	There are quite a few messages on the archive about
> different speed problems with regards to Samba serving files,

Honestly, I think if I can stop smbd barfing and closing sockets, the problems 
might just clear up...

>> 1) Why are so many socket connections being aborted?  How can I track down the 
>> cause?
> 
> 	Try to increase the debug level (log level) to 10, you
> can also strace the process and/or capture the packages to try
> to figure out something.

I've set the debug level to 10 (yay for smbcontrol) and will see what more info 
I can glean.

smbd is repeatedly spewing forth lists of socket options from print_socket_options:

[2007/08/17 10:00:53, 5] lib/util_sock.c:print_socket_options(206)
   socket option SO_KEEPALIVE = 8
[2007/08/17 10:00:53, 5] lib/util_sock.c:print_socket_options(206)
   socket option SO_REUSEADDR = 4
[2007/08/17 10:00:53, 5] lib/util_sock.c:print_socket_options(206)
   socket option SO_BROADCAST = 0
[2007/08/17 10:00:53, 5] lib/util_sock.c:print_socket_options(206)
   socket option TCP_NODELAY = 0
[2007/08/17 10:00:53, 5] lib/util_sock.c:print_socket_options(206)
   socket option IPTOS_LOWDELAY = 0
[2007/08/17 10:00:53, 5] lib/util_sock.c:print_socket_options(206)
   socket option IPTOS_THROUGHPUT = 0
[2007/08/17 10:00:53, 5] lib/util_sock.c:print_socket_options(206)
   socket option SO_SNDBUF = 49152
[2007/08/17 10:00:53, 5] lib/util_sock.c:print_socket_options(206)
   socket option SO_RCVBUF = 49640
[2007/08/17 10:00:53, 5] lib/util_sock.c:print_socket_options(204)
   Could not test socket option SO_SNDLOWAT.
[2007/08/17 10:00:53, 5] lib/util_sock.c:print_socket_options(204)
   Could not test socket option SO_RCVLOWAT.
[2007/08/17 10:00:53, 5] lib/util_sock.c:print_socket_options(204)
   Could not test socket option SO_SNDTIMEO.
[2007/08/17 10:00:53, 5] lib/util_sock.c:print_socket_options(204)
   Could not test socket option SO_RCVTIMEO.

The workstation logs are filling up with so much stuff, I can't tell if any of 
it's an error.

>> 2) Why does set_socket_options have errors for ANY options I specify?  Samba2 
>> didn't.
> 
> 	What options did you tried? Can you post more details
> about your smb.conf?

With samba 2 I used the line:
socket options = SO_KEEPALIVE TCP_NODELAY IPTOS_LOWDELAY SO_BROADCAST

And things were just fine.

>> 3) And what can I say to my boss who keeps asking "What does samba3 give us over 
>> samba2?"  Because frankly, I'm coming up empty.
> 
> 	First, maintainance, Samba2 is deprecated, no security
> updates. It is better to "talk" with client machines in several
> ways. It uses tdbs and/or LDAP, account policies, group mappings.

Well, security's always a good point... Could you possibly elaborate at all on 
what advantage tdbs gives?  I have switched to using it, but, again, the docs 
aren't very specific on its gains.

> 	I'm not sure if you are using LDAP, it is a powerful
> resource, specially if you want to have PDC/BDC behaviour. The
> Samba3 changes a few points in the course of his development, I
> don't know what migration doc you read, but if it is not about
> 3.0.25, you need to check a few extra points from the release
> notes that will solve a few problems.

The only feature of a PDC we use is the single point of authentication.  Other 
than that, we just need to share files (and because of some ridiculously old 
apps, printers).

The possibility of using LDAP has surfaced a few times, but as yet it's been 
avoided as grossly over complex for us, a security hassle, and various other issues.

I read the migration docs on the web site, so if they're not current, someone 
should make them so.

-- 
Curtis Maloney
cmaloney at cardgate.net