[Samba] 32 seconds vs 72 minutes -- expected performance difference?

[Saurabh Nanda]

>
> When you provide an exact vers= then no auto-negotiation happens (unless
> you pass "vers=3" which essentially means 3.x: use 3.0 or above). You
> either get the connection or mount fails. None the less, you can dump
> the current SMB ressources managed by the kernel by looking at
> /proc/fs/cifs/DebugData if your kernel is recent enough it should show
> the SMB version.
>

There is something going horribly wrong with my configuration. Notice that
CIFS version in the debug output below --

Display Internal CIFS Data Structures for Debugging
---------------------------------------------------
CIFS Version 2.10
Features: dfs fscache lanman posix spnego xattr acl
Active VFS Requests: 0
Servers:
Number of credits: 510
1) Name: [REDACTED] Uses: 1 Capability: 0x300047     Session Status: 1
 TCP status: 1
        Local Users To Server: 1 SecMode: 0x1 Req On Wire: 0
        Shares:
        0) IPC: \\[REDACTED]\IPC$ Mounts: 1 DevInfo: 0x0 Attributes: 0x0
        PathComponentMax: 0 Status: 1 type: 0
        Share Capabilities: None        Share Flags: 0x8000

        1) \\[REDACTED]\uploaded_files Mounts: 1 DevInfo: 0x20 Attributes:
0x1006f
        PathComponentMax: 255 Status: 1 type: DISK
        Share Capabilities: None Aligned, Partition Aligned,    Share
Flags: 0x8000     Optimal sector size: 0x200

        MIDs:



> * nounix means the server doesn't support unix extensions. These
> extensions are only
>   supported by samba and for SMB1 only at the moment. Work is in progress
>   to add them to SMB2+.
>

Will this in any way interfere with "case sensitive = yes" -
https://www.samba.org/samba/docs/current/man-html/smb.conf.5.html#NAMEMANGLINGSECT
?


> *  mapposix has been default for a while, it maps reserved characters (: ?
>   \ " etc) to reserved unicode characters to/from the servers so you can
>   use those characters in file names transparently from linux, without
>   needing to rely on protocol extensions.
>

Again, this sounds like it directly conflicts with `nounix`!


> If you provide a trace we could see if any unecesarry packets are
> exchanged or if something goes in loop, or if due to some error, the
> kernel close and reopens the connection often and looses time, ...
>

I have a 1.3 GB capture.pcap from the command you shared earlier. `ls -lR`
ran only for a few minutes, and ended up generating so much network
chatter!

Btw, I have `smb encrypt = required` on the server config. Ideally, I would
hope, the network capture would be useless!

Apart from network capture, is there any debug logging that I can enable to
give similar insights?

-- Saurabh.