ucceeds.
>
> It probably needs some tweaking, but it SHOULD help.
>
> Frank
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Marc Eshel [mailto:es...@us.ibm.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 7, 2016 4:11 PM
> > To: Frank Filz
> > Cc: 'nfs-ganesha-devel'
Marc Eshel
> Cc: Frank Filz ; 'nfs-ganesha-devel'
de...@lists.sourceforge.net>
> Subject: Re: [Nfs-ganesha-devel] NLM async locking
>
> Hi Frank,
> Are you going to push the patch you asked me to test ?
> Thanks, Marc.
>
>
>
>
>
> From: &q
Hi Frank,
Are you going to push the patch you asked me to test ?
Thanks, Marc.
From: "Frank Filz"
To: Marc Eshel/Almaden/IBM@IBMUS
Cc: "'nfs-ganesha-devel'"
Date: 09/07/2016 04:18 PM
Subject: RE: [Nfs-ganesha-devel] NLM async locking
I c
I see, I tried your fix and it did work for the case that I had problems
with.
Thanks, Marc.
From: Frank Filz
To: Marc Eshel/Almaden/IBM@IBMUS
Cc: nfs-ganesha-devel
Date: 09/07/2016 09:14 PM
Subject:Re: [Nfs-ganesha-devel] NLM async locking
Request is resubmitted to
to the FSAL.
> Marc.
>
>
>
> From: "Frank Filz"
> To: Marc Eshel/Almaden/IBM@IBMUS
> Cc: "'nfs-ganesha-devel'"
> Date: 09/07/2016 04:18 PM
> Subject:RE: [Nfs-ganesha-devel] NLM async locking
>
>
>
> I changed i
It will not help if the request is not resubmitted to the FSAL.
Marc.
From: "Frank Filz"
To: Marc Eshel/Almaden/IBM@IBMUS
Cc: "'nfs-ganesha-devel'"
Date: 09/07/2016 04:18 PM
Subject: RE: [Nfs-ganesha-devel] NLM async locking
I changed it so
From: Marc Eshel [mailto:es...@us.ibm.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 7, 2016 4:11 PM
> To: Frank Filz
> Cc: 'nfs-ganesha-devel'
> Subject: RE: [Nfs-ganesha-devel] NLM async locking
>
> Just looking at the code I don't see where you retry the lock request from
&g
Date: 09/07/2016 03:57 PM
Subject: RE: [Nfs-ganesha-devel] NLM async locking
Marc,
Could you try the top commit in this branch:
https://github.com/ffilz/nfs-ganesha/commits/async
It may not be the complete solution, but I think it will help your
scenario.
I need to do more work on as
ent: Wednesday, September 7, 2016 9:42 AM
> To: 'Marc Eshel'
> Cc: 'nfs-ganesha-devel'
> Subject: Re: [Nfs-ganesha-devel] NLM async locking
>
> Ok, I'm not sure this ever worked right...
>
> With the lock available upcall, we never put the lock back
Ok, I'm not sure this ever worked right...
With the lock available upcall, we never put the lock back on the blocked
lock list if an attempt to acquire the lock from the FSAL fails...
So the way the lock available upcall is supposed to work:
Client requests conflicting lock
Blocked lock gets reg
Did you get a chance to look at this problem?
Marc.
From: "Frank Filz"
To: Marc Eshel/Almaden/IBM@IBMUS
Cc: "'nfs-ganesha-devel'"
Date: 08/29/2016 02:37 PM
Subject:RE: NLM async locking
> I see the following failure:
> 1. Get conflicting locks from 3 clients
> cli 1
PM
Subject:Re: [Nfs-ganesha-devel] NLM async locking
Marc, there is a known issue with that failure message but I thought
client needs a cancel request. See if my hack fixes it but I never got
a chance to fix it properly, so is not in upstream yet.
See 924e7464f in ganltc repo and see
Marc, there is a known issue with that failure message but I thought
client needs a cancel request. See if my hack fixes it but I never got
a chance to fix it properly, so is not in upstream yet.
See 924e7464f in ganltc repo and see that helps.
Regards, Malahal.
On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 3:50 PM,
> I see the following failure:
> 1. Get conflicting locks from 3 clients
> cli 1 gets 0-100
> cli 2 is blocked on 0-1000
> cli 3 is blocked on 0-1
> 2. cli 1 unlocks
> up-call for cli 2 and 3 to retry
> cli 2 gets 0-1000
> cli 3 is blocked on 0-1000
> 3. cli 2 unlocks
>
Hi Frank,
I see the following failure:
1. Get conflicting locks from 3 clients
cli 1 gets 0-100
cli 2 is blocked on 0-1000
cli 3 is blocked on 0-1
2. cli 1 unlocks
up-call for cli 2 and 3 to retry
cli 2 gets 0-1000
cli 3 is blocked on 0-1000
3. cli 2 unlocks
up-cal
15 matches
Mail list logo
