Chris's Wiki :: blog/linux/NFSSambaLocking Commentshttps://utcc.utoronto.ca/~cks/space/blog/linux/NFSSambaLocking?atomcommentsDWiki2011-10-17T22:08:29ZRecent comments in Chris's Wiki :: blog/linux/NFSSambaLocking.From 173.226.190.126 on /blog/linux/NFSSambaLockingtag:CSpace:blog/linux/NFSSambaLocking:c25cd3de8d84a124efdf4a73ba8bae6a58608101From 173.226.190.126<div class="wikitext"><p>Thanks for posting this. I ran into the same issue, and was about to resort to using <code>locking = no</code>. <code>posix locking = no</code> fixes the problem while still providing some degree of locking.</p>
</div>2011-10-17T22:08:29ZFrom 138.237.151.175 on /blog/linux/NFSSambaLockingtag:CSpace:blog/linux/NFSSambaLocking:d6fb691bd64132dad726f1bb6d0a3d34fa3006dcFrom 138.237.151.175<div class="wikitext"><p>I had a very similar issue with Samba running in a RedHat cluster. Samba running on a single node (no ctdb) would be unbearably slow until we increased the cluster lock limits. Even then there would be slowdowns under heavy usage or during just certain operations, installing an application from a share for instance. I'm curious who to point the finger at, Samba or the smb windows clients.</p>
</div>2010-10-04T14:31:03Z