Christos Zoulas wrote:
> In article <e7nbeb$pni$1@sea.gmane.org>,
> Mark Cullen  <mark.r.cullen@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>>I am experiencing a memory leak of some sorts related to Samba. I 
>>strongly believe it is related to the the PR [1] which is still 'Open'. 
>>I have run the included test program from the said PR, and I get the 
>>following output:
>>
>>(root@bone)/root# ./telldir-memuse.o
>>telldir-memuse.o: Used 8192 extra bytes for 250 telldir calls
>>telldir-memuse.o: Used 12288 extra bytes for 377 telldir calls
>>telldir-memuse.o: Used 16384 extra bytes for 504 telldir calls
>>telldir-memuse.o: Used 20480 extra bytes for 631 telldir calls
>>telldir-memuse.o: Used 24576 extra bytes for 758 telldir calls
>>telldir-memuse.o: Used 28672 extra bytes for 885 telldir calls
>>telldir-memuse.o: Failure: leaked 28672 bytes
>>
>>Is there any plans to fix this? There is a patch included, but it was 
>>filed for 1.6 by the looks of it. I'm not sure if it'll work with 3.x?
>>
>>As it stands, Samba is fairly unusable for me because of this, or at 
>>least I think it's this. I never had the problem on FreeBSD, but that 
>>was with Samba 3.0.21b, I am now using 3.0.22. I've mailed the Samba 
>>lists, but I am sure it's related to this bug. The memory of the smbd 
>>process increases if I hold down F5 (to refresh) in explorer, in a Samba 
>>share. The memory 'leaked' appears to be more when there are more files 
>>in the share being refreshed.
> 
> 
> It is probably easier to apply the patch to 3.0 rather than backport
> the code from current to 3.0...
> 
> christos
> 
> 

Is there any particular reason the original patch never got commited to 1.6?