<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 10.00.9200.16618"></HEAD>
<BODY style="FONT: 10pt Segoe UI; MARGIN: 4px 4px 1px">
<DIV>Hi,</DIV>
<DIV>over the weekend I installed ctdb from here <A href="https://ftp.samba.org/pub/ctdb/packages/redhat/RHEL6/2.5.1/">https://ftp.samba.org/pub/ctdb/packages/redhat/RHEL6/2.5.1/</A> .</DIV>
<DIV>Now the situation is even worse than before. The tdb databases of Samba are clustered now, but of course all of them are clustered.</DIV>
<DIV>I can join the first server in to the AD domain without problems. When I join the second one (the tdb are clustered) it messes the join of the first.</DIV>
<DIV>This might be desirable in an HA situation where an ip takeover happens but for me it is contra productive. This is mentioned somewhere in the samba </DIV>
<DIV>documentation. It would be nice to only have the tdb clustered where the locks happen but maybe this use case is too strange.</DIV>
<DIV>And of course this is no Glusterfs problem anymore.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><BR><BR>>>> Paul Robert Marino <prmarino1@gmail.com> 23.01.2014 23:12 >>><BR>Ira<BR><BR>In clustered mode stores locking information in a TDB so thats why you<BR>need to configure CTDB and tell samba its clustered in the configed so<BR>it will keep the sync databases in sync.<BR><BR>By the way samba does still do spinlocks or at least it did last year<BR>here an intresting thread where they were talking about spinlocks,<BR>fcntl locks and TDB based locks<BR><A href="https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/mailing.unix.samba-technical/hM-t2pBf_Hs">https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/mailing.unix.samba-technical/hM-t2pBf_Hs</A><BR><BR>That said spinlocks are just the first thing that came to mind<BR>(because that was part of many discussions back in the 2.x days) and<BR>was not best choice of words on my part.<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 4:48 PM, Paul Robert Marino <prmarino1@gmail.com> wrote:<BR>> check this article its fairly strait forward <A href="http://ctdb.samba.org/samba.html">http://ctdb.samba.org/samba.html</A><BR>> if you don't get this configured properly then your locking wouldn't work.<BR>><BR>> by the way oplocks need to be enabled based on an other post it looks<BR>> like you turned off all locking support.<BR>><BR>><BR>> On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Paul Robert Marino <prmarino1@gmail.com> wrote:<BR>>> Are you using CTDB on a shared gluster volume instead of TDB on a local<BR>>> volume which is samba default.<BR>>><BR>>> If not this may explain your issue because Samba stores or at least did ate<BR>>> one time store spinlocks in the TDB for speed.<BR>>><BR>>><BR>>><BR>>> -- Sent from my HP Pre3<BR>>><BR>>> ________________________________<BR>>> On Jan 23, 2014 10:31, Adrian Valeanu <Adrian.Valeanu@idiada.com> wrote:<BR>>><BR>>> Hi,<BR>>> I try to replicate some data that resides on two CentOS servers. The<BR>>> replicated data should be shared using Samba to the users. It should be<BR>>> avoided that two users<BR>>> try to work on the same file using MS Office. If the users access the same<BR>>> file on one server, one of them is not able to modify the file. This is<BR>>> possible (and the normal operation)<BR>>> if one uses one server with Samba. I assumed that this kind of lock would be<BR>>> replicated too.<BR>>><BR>>> I did not knew about libgfapi and have not used it yesterday. I used the<BR>>> fuse mounted directory as data source for Samba.<BR>>><BR>>> Yesterday night I updated both CentOS servers. They are CentOS 6.5 now. Now<BR>>> locking does not happen at all any more. After you mentioned libgfapi I<BR>>> found this:<BR>>> <A href="https://www.mail-archive.com/gluster-users@gluster.org/msg13033.html">https://www.mail-archive.com/gluster-users@gluster.org/msg13033.html</A><BR>>><BR>>> I managed to compile the module and switched to samba-glusterfs-vfs. But I<BR>>> still have no locking<BR>>> My Samba configuration looks like this:<BR>>> [glusterdata-vfs]<BR>>> vfs object = glusterfs<BR>>> glusterfs:volume = gv0<BR>>> path = /<BR>>> glusterfs:loglevel = 2<BR>>> glusterfs:logfile = /var/log/samba/glusterdata-vfs.log<BR>>><BR>>> read only = no<BR>>> browseable = yes<BR>>> guest ok = no<BR>>> printable = no<BR>>> nt acl support = yes<BR>>> acl map full control = yes<BR>>><BR>>> Thank you for your attention.<BR>>><BR>>><BR>>>>>> Lalatendu Mohanty <lmohanty@redhat.com> 22.01.2014 16:10 >>><BR>>>><BR>>> On 01/22/2014 08:30 PM, Adrian Valeanu wrote:<BR>>><BR>>> Hi,<BR>>> I have set up glusterfs 3.4.2 over an 10Gig xfs filesystem on two CentOS 6<BR>>> servers. The gluster filesystem is shared through Samba on both servers.<BR>>> Replication is working like a charm but file locking is not. Is it possible<BR>>> to have file locking working in this configuration in an way that Microsoft<BR>>> Office 2010<BR>>> behaves like as if the files were on the same server? Does somebody have<BR>>> such an configuration?<BR>>> I tried a lot of the Samba configurations found on the mailing list but none<BR>>> showed the expected results.<BR>>><BR>>><BR>>> Are you using Samba with libgfapi? I am not sure if I understand your<BR>>> expectation on locking through Samba. Some more context would be nice.<BR>>><BR>>> -Lala<BR>>><BR>>> Thank you<BR>>><BR>>><BR>>> _______________________________________________<BR>>> Gluster-users mailing list<BR>>> Gluster-users@gluster.org<BR>>> <A href="http://supercolony.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users">http://supercolony.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users</A><BR>>><BR>>><BR></DIV></BODY></HTML>