Re: cifs large write performance improvements to Samba

[bert hubert]

On Sun, Dec 12, 2004 at 11:45:38PM -0600, Steve French wrote:

> Running with a faster processor (otherwise the same) this improved to
> 19.3 seconds average (and using the even larger 120K write size
> performance dropped slightly to 20.6 seconds)

While this is all supremely cool, my inbox has several reactions from cifs
users about my never addressed query [1] on linux-cifs-clients regarding memory
leaks you can drive a truck through in cifs.

[1] http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-cifs-client&m=109221678006861&w=2

I'd love to deploy cifs and I've recommended it to many people, they've all
switched back to smbfs!

Now while I fully understand open source ethics (breaks, both pieces etc),
I'd really hope cifs would shape up in terms of ""enterprise reliability"".

Anything I can do to help, let me know. The referred URL contains some of my
conclusions at the time.

Thanks.

-- 
http://www.PowerDNS.com      Open source, database driven DNS Software 
http://lartc.org           Linux Advanced Routing & Traffic Control HOWTO
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/