In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Trond Myklebust writes:
>
> On Sat, 2007-10-20 at 17:35 -0400, Erez Zadok wrote:
>
> > Trond, I verified that w/ the above patch the problem is w/ nfs: the client
> > leaves .nfsXXX files behind for every file unlinked while open. Let me know
> > when you get a
On Sat, 2007-10-20 at 17:35 -0400, Erez Zadok wrote:
> Trond, I verified that w/ the above patch the problem is w/ nfs: the client
> leaves .nfsXXX files behind for every file unlinked while open. Let me know
> when you get a fix and I'll test it.
Doh... Another typo.
Trond
On Sat, 2007-10-20 at 17:35 -0400, Erez Zadok wrote:
Trond, I verified that w/ the above patch the problem is w/ nfs: the client
leaves .nfsXXX files behind for every file unlinked while open. Let me know
when you get a fix and I'll test it.
Doh... Another typo.
Trond
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Trond Myklebust writes:
On Sat, 2007-10-20 at 17:35 -0400, Erez Zadok wrote:
Trond, I verified that w/ the above patch the problem is w/ nfs: the client
leaves .nfsXXX files behind for every file unlinked while open. Let me know
when you get a fix and I'll
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Erez Zadok writes:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Trond Myklebust writes:
[...]
> > Looking at
> > nfs_proc_create(), there is indeed a missing call to
> > nfs_mark_for_revalidate(). The reason why you need such a call being the
> > usual one: NFSv2 doesn't
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Trond Myklebust writes:
>
> On Fri, 2007-10-19 at 22:33 -0400, Erez Zadok wrote:
> > Trond, good news. I was able to narrow down the problem to purely the
> > client-side, probably dcache/readdir related, and I have a shell script that
> > deterministically
On Fri, 2007-10-19 at 22:33 -0400, Erez Zadok wrote:
> Trond, good news. I was able to narrow down the problem to purely the
> client-side, probably dcache/readdir related, and I have a shell script that
> deterministically triggers the problem each time for me (this is a FC6 image
> under
On Fri, 2007-10-19 at 22:33 -0400, Erez Zadok wrote:
Trond, good news. I was able to narrow down the problem to purely the
client-side, probably dcache/readdir related, and I have a shell script that
deterministically triggers the problem each time for me (this is a FC6 image
under Vmware
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Trond Myklebust writes:
On Fri, 2007-10-19 at 22:33 -0400, Erez Zadok wrote:
Trond, good news. I was able to narrow down the problem to purely the
client-side, probably dcache/readdir related, and I have a shell script that
deterministically triggers the
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Erez Zadok writes:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Trond Myklebust writes:
[...]
Looking at
nfs_proc_create(), there is indeed a missing call to
nfs_mark_for_revalidate(). The reason why you need such a call being the
usual one: NFSv2 doesn't provide post-op
Trond, good news. I was able to narrow down the problem to purely the
client-side, probably dcache/readdir related, and I have a shell script that
deterministically triggers the problem each time for me (this is a FC6 image
under Vmware 6.0.1). Here's a short shell script which reliably triggers
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Trond Myklebust writes:
>
> On Fri, 2007-10-19 at 17:40 -0400, Erez Zadok wrote:
[...]
> > Trond, I was able to narrow down the problem w/o using unionfs at all (yay!
> > :-). All I do is setup a loop device, mkfs it as ext2, mount it, then
> > export it to
On Fri, 2007-10-19 at 17:40 -0400, Erez Zadok wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Trond Myklebust writes:
> >
> > On Fri, 2007-10-19 at 01:49 -0400, Erez Zadok wrote:
> > > I'm testing unionfs on top of nfsv2/3/4, using 2.6.24 as of linus's commit
> > >
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Trond Myklebust writes:
>
> On Fri, 2007-10-19 at 01:49 -0400, Erez Zadok wrote:
> > I'm testing unionfs on top of nfsv2/3/4, using 2.6.24 as of linus's commit
> > 4fa4d23fa20de67df919030c1216295664866ad7. A lot of my unionfs regression
> > tests are failing on
On Fri, 2007-10-19 at 01:49 -0400, Erez Zadok wrote:
> I'm testing unionfs on top of nfsv2/3/4, using 2.6.24 as of linus's commit
> 4fa4d23fa20de67df919030c1216295664866ad7. A lot of my unionfs regression
> tests are failing on nfs2, b/c files that should be deleted, aren't. It
> feels like
Trond, good news. I was able to narrow down the problem to purely the
client-side, probably dcache/readdir related, and I have a shell script that
deterministically triggers the problem each time for me (this is a FC6 image
under Vmware 6.0.1). Here's a short shell script which reliably triggers
On Fri, 2007-10-19 at 17:40 -0400, Erez Zadok wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Trond Myklebust writes:
On Fri, 2007-10-19 at 01:49 -0400, Erez Zadok wrote:
I'm testing unionfs on top of nfsv2/3/4, using 2.6.24 as of linus's commit
4fa4d23fa20de67df919030c1216295664866ad7. A lot
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Trond Myklebust writes:
On Fri, 2007-10-19 at 01:49 -0400, Erez Zadok wrote:
I'm testing unionfs on top of nfsv2/3/4, using 2.6.24 as of linus's commit
4fa4d23fa20de67df919030c1216295664866ad7. A lot of my unionfs regression
tests are failing on nfs2, b/c
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Trond Myklebust writes:
On Fri, 2007-10-19 at 17:40 -0400, Erez Zadok wrote:
[...]
Trond, I was able to narrow down the problem w/o using unionfs at all (yay!
:-). All I do is setup a loop device, mkfs it as ext2, mount it, then
export it to localhost and
On Fri, 2007-10-19 at 01:49 -0400, Erez Zadok wrote:
I'm testing unionfs on top of nfsv2/3/4, using 2.6.24 as of linus's commit
4fa4d23fa20de67df919030c1216295664866ad7. A lot of my unionfs regression
tests are failing on nfs2, b/c files that should be deleted, aren't. It
feels like there
I'm testing unionfs on top of nfsv2/3/4, using 2.6.24 as of linus's commit
4fa4d23fa20de67df919030c1216295664866ad7. A lot of my unionfs regression
tests are failing on nfs2, b/c files that should be deleted, aren't. It
feels like there may be a ref leak that prevents the files from being
I'm testing unionfs on top of nfsv2/3/4, using 2.6.24 as of linus's commit
4fa4d23fa20de67df919030c1216295664866ad7. A lot of my unionfs regression
tests are failing on nfs2, b/c files that should be deleted, aren't. It
feels like there may be a ref leak that prevents the files from being
22 matches
Mail list logo
