On Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 8:31 PM, Yehuda Sadeh Weinraub
wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 8:02 PM, Sage Weil wrote:
>
>>
>> BTW the corruption I was seeing was that the second page was written to
>> the first page (or something very close to that, possibly shifted by a
>> byte?).
>>
>
> I see t
On Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 8:02 PM, Sage Weil wrote:
>
> BTW the corruption I was seeing was that the second page was written to
> the first page (or something very close to that, possibly shifted by a
> byte?).
>
I see the last page being written over the first one, also shifted by one
byte. The r
On Wed, 30 Dec 2009, Yehuda Sadeh Weinraub wrote:
> There still is a problem with vi and multiple users. E.g., the following
> scenario fails:
>
> client1: cd /mnt; cp ~/foo .
> client2: head foo
> client1: vi foo;
> client2: head foo
>
> now foo appears to be corrupted.
>
> I guess it is likel
There still is a problem with vi and multiple users. E.g., the following
scenario fails:
client1: cd /mnt; cp ~/foo .
client2: head foo
client1: vi foo;
client2: head foo
now foo appears to be corrupted.
I guess it is likely that is still related to the truncation reporting that
was found yeste
