SOLVED CIFS File size limit to >100GB ?

Status
Not open for further replies.

ThunderLord

Cadet
Joined
Jun 7, 2015
Messages
3
Hallo,

my setup:
_______________________________________________________________
Mainboard : ASRock E3C224D4I-14S
CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM) i3-4150 CPU @ 3.50GHz
Memory: 16295MB 2 x 8GB Kingston KVR16E11/8I(ECC, Unbuffered)
Disks: 4 x 8 TB Disks Wester (Seagate ST8000AS0002)
1 x OCZ SSD 30GB Vertex (system disk)

Raid z2 with encryption

FreeNAS-9.3-STABLE-201505130355
_______________________________________________________________

My problem is that every time i try to transfer files bigger than 100GB via the CIFS service,
an error occurs on the windows machines, that the storrage is not available.

So, is there an session limit which can be configured?

I also configured the iSCSI service to check if there is something wrong with the ethernet setup. But that is working so i susspect no.

Has anyone else such a problem?

Thank you very much in advance for your answers.
 

SweetAndLow

Sweet'NASty
Joined
Nov 6, 2013
Messages
6,421
Are there any errors in the freenas logs? try /var/log/messages


also, wfm:
Code:
dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/homes/100G count=400 bs=256M
400+0 records in
400+0 records out
107374182400 bytes (107 GB) copied, 2086.3 s, 51.5 MB/s
 
Last edited:

ThunderLord

Cadet
Joined
Jun 7, 2015
Messages
3
Hallo,

there is an error about matchname failed.
___________________________
Jun 7 08:48:01 freenas smbd[18831]: matchname failed on 192.168.1.4
Jun 7 08:52:08 freenas ntpd_initres[2149]: host name not found: 0.freebsd.pool.ntp.org
Jun 7 08:52:08 freenas ntpd_initres[2149]: host name not found: 1.freebsd.pool.ntp.org
Jun 7 08:52:08 freenas ntpd_initres[2149]: host name not found: 2.freebsd.pool.ntp.org
Jun 7 08:57:19 freenas smbd[19319]: STATUS=daemon 'smbd' finished starting up and ready to serve connectionsmatchname: host name/name mismatch: 192.168.1.4 != (NULL)
Jun 7 08:57:19 freenas smbd[19319]: [2015/06/07 08:57:19.859021, 0] ../source3/lib/util_sock.c:1199(get_remote_hostname)
Jun 7 08:57:19 freenas smbd[19319]: matchname failed on 192.168.1.4
___________________________

192.168.1.4 is the IP adress of the client which trys to acces the share. (Windows 7)
192.168.1.3 is the IP adress of the freenas box.

What does the the error "matchname failed" mean.
And why is the smbd starting up, allthough im using it like an hour ago?
It takes about an half hour to reproduce the error.
 
Last edited:

BigDave

FreeNAS Enthusiast
Joined
Oct 6, 2013
Messages
2,479
And why is the smbd starting up, allthough im using it like an hour ago?
Since it's been over an hour since the last response, I'll try to give some limited help.
The Samba daemon (smbd) runs in the background and provides connections for
client machines. The man pages are found here :cool:

As for the matchname thing, turning off the Hostnames Lookups (unchecking the box)
located in FreeNAS GUI under "Services/CIFS/Settings". Turning off this setting seems
to put an end to that error. FYI, I found this information by searching this forum and Google ;)
Hope this was of some bit of help :)

edit: link source post *this information*
 
Last edited:

ThunderLord

Cadet
Joined
Jun 7, 2015
Messages
3
Hallo,

i did know that the samba deamon provided the cifs share.
But i was wondering why it would start/restart in the middle of an transfer.

Thank you for the link. I should have googled it, but didn't thougt of it.... mehhh...

The problem with the transfer of big files still remained... until i changed the the network card in the client pc.
I saw, when i endabled full logging of the smbd, that the connection was terminated with no error on the server side.

Thank you very much for your help.
 

BigDave

FreeNAS Enthusiast
Joined
Oct 6, 2013
Messages
2,479
The problem with the transfer of big files still remained... until i changed the the network card in the client pc.
I saw, when i endabled full logging of the smbd, that the connection was terminated with no error on the server side.
You taught me something with your solution, I never really thought about the client side possibly being the issue *thank you*:cool:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top