On Mon, 19 Sep 2011 10:20:49 -0400 Jeffrey Altman <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 9/19/2011 9:36 AM, Andrew Deason wrote: > > On Sun, 18 Sep 2011 10:20:05 +0200 > > Dirk Heinrichs <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> The only thing I did was to "vos release" _another_ volume that was > >> mounted below .../sw and which showed up as "not released" in the > >> output of "vos listvldb". Does this also count as "being on a > >> read/write path"? [...] > The state of foo.readonly should not impact the evaluation of > /afs/cell/sw. There clearly is something weird going on here. Yes, sorry, I read 'below' as 'above'. In this case, perhaps the client still had old vldb information, which did not contain the RO site? The 'vos examine' info for the RO said: Creation Sat Sep 17 09:41:04 2011 Copy Sat Sep 17 09:41:04 2011 Backup Never Last Access Sat Sep 17 09:40:59 2011 Last Update Sat Sep 17 09:40:59 2011 And the original problem was seen around: % touch sw/foo % ll -g -n sw/foo -rw------- 1 100 0 2011-09-17 11:14 sw/foo Which is less than two hours later. If around 9:40 on Saturday was the first time that RO had existed, you need to wait about 2 hours to guarantee all clients will "see" the new RO (or you can run 'fs checkv' on specific clients, to not need to wait). -- Andrew Deason [email protected] _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-info mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
