Extra options to add to SMB/CIFS settings?

1st Official Post

    Hi,


    I found several posts about extra options to tuning and optimize SMB/CIFS services, but many are old posts or replicate the same content.

    Thus I open this post to invite everyone using options to add theirs.


    Thank you for your help and advices :)

    Chris


    Tuning Samba for more speed (Feb 29th 2016, MV Forum)


    Tuning Samba for more speed 2 (Jul 31st 2016, OMV Forum)

    Code
    # Same as below, with
read raw = yes 1


    [How-To] Hide Shared Folders that a User can't access (Jan 19th 2020, OMV Forum)

    Code
    access based share enum = yes


    Open Media Vault SMB performance quick win (June 29th 2020, techie-show.com)

    Code
    # Same as the first, without
dead time = 15

# sorin added seetings definition in his article.


    And this post which resumes preview posts

    Does OMV5 still benefit from SMB tweak/tuning? (Apr 7th 2020, reddit.com)

    • Official Post

    To me it does not make sense to post different smb settings as these settings are serving a purpose. So they might make sense or not depending on the use case.


    If you want to check whether or not a setting makes sense for your situation, it might be best to consult the documentation

    https://www.samba.org/samba/do…/man-html/smb.conf.5.html

    Quote

    To me it does not make sense to post different smb settings as these settings are serving a purpose. So they might make sense or not depending on the use case.


    If you want to check whether or not a setting makes sense for your situation, it might be best to consult the documentation

    https://www.samba.org/samba/do…/man-html/smb.conf.5.html


    Ok macom I understand your position.


    I forgot to specify this post is to share experience and to give some recommendations about generic extra options which are usually interesting to apply.


    Each is free to apply or not them.

    Thanks geaves, hope its meant in a positive way :)


    My view: Facts collected via repeatable benchmarks will help to find the right SMB extra options.


    I've performed benchmarks using certain SMB extra options for OMV5 (link in my signature below) and am currently running the same benchmarks for OMV6.

    I plan to publish the results in the next weeks, but also look into a process to allow volunteers to run benchmarks more easily.

    An idea would be to use the standard Phoronix benchmark for SMB called dbench (more info here)


    I would like to explore performance of BTRFS RAID versus hardware RAID controllers at a later time too (see related questions I have here)


    chrbar does this help?

    omv 6.9.6-2 (Shaitan) on RPi CM4/4GB with 64bit Kernel 6.1.21-v8+

    2x 6TB 3.5'' HDDs (CMR) formatted with ext4 via 2port PCIe SATA card with ASM1061R chipset providing hardware supported RAID1


    omv 6.9.3-1 (Shaitan) on RPi4/4GB with 32bit Kernel 5.10.63 and WittyPi 3 V2 RTC HAT

    2x 3TB 3.5'' HDDs (CMR) formatted with ext4 in Icy Box IB-RD3662-C31 / hardware supported RAID1

    For Read/Write performance of SMB shares hosted on this hardware see forum here

    Thanks 1

    My OMV installation was a pre-built odroid HC1 OMV 4 image which i upgraded to OMV 5 and then to OMV 6. My extra options settings had the following in it:

    Code
    min receivefile size = 16384
getwd cache = yes
write cache size = 524288
socket options = TCP_NODELAY IPTOS_LOWDELAY

    I had to remove write cache size as it is deprecated as of samba 4.13 (it was removed in 4.12). I also removed the socket options as it seems to be included by default. Does it make sense to keep the remaining two options?

    I'm using RPI5 and OMV7, checking if your settings improve the performance.


    socket options = TCP_NODELAY SO_RCVBUF=65536 SO_SNDBUF=65536read raw = yes

    write raw = yes

    max xmit = 65535

    dead time = 15

    getwd cache = yes


    # Optionnal:

    min protocol = smb2


    # Not required (already applied):

    log level = 1


    # doguibnu member added seetings definition in his post.


    Still works with a very low transfer speed, 1.5MB/s


    Thanks.

Participate now!

Don’t have an account yet? Register yourself now and be a part of our community!

Register Yourself Login