[Samba] Q: Samba Proxy or SAMBA Cluster?

Volker Lendecke Volker.Lendecke at SerNet.DE
Fri Mar 9 08:27:45 GMT 2007

On Fri, Mar 09, 2007 at 09:02:19PM +1300, Jason Haar wrote:
> ?? doesn't that contradict the smb.conf man page?
>          "Kernel oplocks support allows Samba oplocks to be broken
> whenever a
>           local UNIX process or NFS operation accesses a  file  that 
> smbd(8)
>           has   oplocked.  This  allows  complete  data  consistency 
> between
>           SMB/CIFS, NFS and local file access (and is  a  very  cool 
> feature
>           :-)"
> I read that as meaning you get complete data consistency between SMB,
> NFS and local file access :-)
> Ahh. I just found the posting you refer to. You're saying the above only
> works if the Samba server is also the NFS server? Not an NFS client?
> I'm really surprised at that

This means that yes, we get data consistency when Samba and
other Unix processes access the same file space.

In this sense Samba does not count as a normal Unix process
because it has to fulfil other locking requirements on
behalf of its clients. It is these locking requirements that
go beyond what Posix can provide that lead to data
corruption when multiple Windows clients access the same
file space via different Samba instances.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/attachments/20070309/c3bf9271/attachment.bin

More information about the samba mailing list