From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Oct 10 06:37:33 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C21CF16A41F for ; Mon, 10 Oct 2005 06:37:33 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from MTaylor@bytecraft.com.au) Received: from wolf.bytecraft.au.com (wolf.bytecraft.au.com [203.39.118.1]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 179E443D46 for ; Mon, 10 Oct 2005 06:37:32 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from MTaylor@bytecraft.com.au) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by wolf.bytecraft.au.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j9A6bUdV020164; Mon, 10 Oct 2005 16:37:30 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from MTaylor@bytecraft.com.au) Received: from wolf.bytecraft.au.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (wolf.bytecraft.au.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 19957-02; Mon, 10 Oct 2005 16:37:30 +1000 (EST) Received: from svmarshal.bytecraft.au.com ([10.0.0.4]) by wolf.bytecraft.au.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j9A6b0XC020140; Mon, 10 Oct 2005 16:37:00 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from MTaylor@bytecraft.com.au) Received: from svmailmel.bytecraft.internal (Not Verified[10.0.0.24]) by svmarshal.bytecraft.au.com with MailMarshal (v5, 0, 3, 78) id ; Mon, 10 Oct 2005 16:37:00 +1000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 16:36:59 +1000 Message-ID: <04E232FDCD9FBE43857F7066CAD3C0F1053BDD@svmailmel.bytecraft.internal> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: unexplained system hangs - possible smbfs issue ?? Thread-Index: AcXNXFxnlSrCLGjXT8ObMcNkwzaIEAABdCzA From: "Murray Taylor" To: "Garrett Cooper" , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="--=b6f8d541-6d2d-445b-82d3-a044044d602c" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: Subject: RE: unexplained system hangs - possible smbfs issue ?? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 06:37:33 -0000 ----=b6f8d541-6d2d-445b-82d3-a044044d602c Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit --------------------------------------------------------------- The information transmitted in this e-mail is for the exclusive use of the intended addressee and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, re-transmission, dissemination or other use of it, or the taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons and/or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please inform the sender and/or addressee immediately and delete the material. E-mails may not be secure, may contain computer viruses and may be corrupted in transmission. Please carefully check this e-mail (and any attachment) accordingly. No warranties are given and no liability is accepted for any loss or damage caused by such matters. --------------------------------------------------------------- ***This Email has been scanned for Viruses by MailMarshal.*** ----=b6f8d541-6d2d-445b-82d3-a044044d602c Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20 -----Original Message----- From: owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Garrett Cooper Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 3:35 PM To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: unexplained system hangs - possible smbfs issue ?? Murray, Have you thought of looking into filing a bug report with the =20 Samba people (http://www.samba.org/)? This may be an issue with =20 either your client program, or the SMB implementation in Win2k3, =20 which can be solved by getting the ball rolling with SMB and/or =20 possibly MS. Either way, that is quite a few files to have to parse through, =20 and although it may seem somewhat ludicrous, adding an additional =20 script to presort out your minute reports would greatly reduce the =20 amount of open-file records you need, and while that may not be a =20 permanent solution it can serve as a better base for sorting your =20 data. You could just create proper directories on the Win2k3 server, =20 like %BASE_DIR%\Year\Day\Hour, if you get a large volume of files, or =20 just strictly put them in a daily directory since it sounds like your =20 volume is manageable. Plus, it's probably easier for humans to manage =20 as opposed to 2000+ flat files in the same directory ;). Any SQL =20 would handle this issue nicely as well since one of databases' best =20 selling points is this type of application. -Garrett _______________________________________________ Garrett, Thanks for your input, as it all ties things up with the observed problem which we have been slowly closing in on by a process of isolating processes onto a 'sacrifical' host.=20 BTW it still seems to be a bit time dependant, unless the=20 comments regarding the extra files of zero length mentioned in other replies and PR's apply here. Our test bed _never_ crashed under high load testing (20K+ files grown incrementally). Maybe the test bed always had 'appropriate' files and/or file structures..... (sigh) (really silly thought - I wonder if it is as 'simple' as needing=20 an even / odd file count when the count gets high?? ) A 'move_files to dated directory' process is being built within the main process as a final=20 operation for cleanup. This will mean that the smbfs will never have more than 10 files or so in any given 1 minute cycle. cheers mjt =20 ----=b6f8d541-6d2d-445b-82d3-a044044d602c--