[Samba] Re: Performance issues after samba update (utime?)

Alex Still alex.ranskis at gmail.com
Thu Feb 28 13:40:45 GMT 2008

On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 8:07 PM, Volker Lendecke <Volker.Lendecke at sernet.de>

> On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 07:43:42PM +0100, Alex Still wrote:
> > I think I found it.
> > Samba-3.0.28 calls set_filetime() from real_write_file(), which 3.0.8isn't
> > doing.
> > set_filetime -> utimes -> nfs SETATTR (in my case)
> > After removing that bit from real_write_file, I get exactly the same
> > performance I had before. Now, I realise this has probably been put
> there
> > for a reason...
> >
> > Stuck now, any advice on the matter appreciated
> It was put there to properly support the so-called sticky
> write time feature that for example Excel depends upon.
> Stefan Metzmacher has written a patch that needs to be
> merged that avoids those utime calls by putting the relevant
> data into locking.tdb. We need to take some time to shape up
> that patch a bit and merge upstream though.

Many thanks for that explanation.
I just read about that sticky write time "feature" in
www.nasconf.com/pres05/allison.pdf , nice quirk in the protocol !

I think I will still have a performance hit once the patch is in tho,
because samba 3.0.8, in addition to not supporting the "sticky write time",
doesnt seem to call set_filetime at all within real_write_file() . This is
introduced in samba 3.0.11
I guess the real fix would be to stop serving NFS shares.

Best regards,


More information about the samba mailing list