>> I don't know the specifics of your NFS filesystem, but does locking >> actually work on it? > >Sorry, don't know. I might research a way to test that.
If you're capable, a simple test program would do it. One that checks read locks and write locks. From what you posted, read locks work, write locks do not (at least to the older server). It looks like you're running the right things; it may just be a bug somewhere. >This shell is on the same host as before. I automount ~/Mail to a >remote NFS filesystem, but that remote host is physically in same >datacenter. All 3 hosts have similar firewall setups, that I think (I'm >not an expert) these are good/secure for NFS. It does occur to me that a firewall can interfere with RPC services, since you don't know what port the services will end up using; I see "nlockmgr" running on port 45923 and 43311 on your server, so maybe checking with tcpdump to see if your client is sending stuff to it and if it is actually getting received by the server would be useful. This does bring to light some nmh behavior that is sub-optimal. We use write-locks in folder.c to read the sequence file (that's what the second argument to folder_read() ends up doing). But unless we're packing the folder that isn't necessary; it occurs to me that we should probably just get a read lock when we're not calling folder_pack(). This might make the "folder" command work for you, but plenty of other nmh commands lock the sequence file so it would just be a band-aid on top of your real problem. --Ken _______________________________________________ Nmh-workers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
