* Coy Hile [2005-10-27 12:19:30 -0700]:
On Thu, 27 Oct 2005, E. Chris Garrison wrote:
Thanks for the suggestions, Coy.
It doesn't complain about any of those, but the afsd processes are
still running and 'modinfo' still shows the module.
I've seen the same thing here on my systems.
On Fri, 28 Oct 2005, Sergio Gelato wrote:
One caveat though is that if things are trying to access files in AFS on
the client while you shutdown the client, the afsd processes won't die.
Precisely. Having recently tried to upgrade OpenAFS on a Solaris 8
test system via the modunload route, I
* Derrick J Brashear [2005-10-28 08:51:46 -0400]:
On Fri, 28 Oct 2005, Sergio Gelato wrote:
Precisely. Having recently tried to upgrade OpenAFS on a Solaris 8
test system via the modunload route, I can say that if AFS is in active
use there is a good chance of the modunload approach triggering
Hello,
We are in the process of deploying a large OpenAFS system on many
different platforms, including central services. One such central
service is a cluster of Solaris machines (running Solaris 8).
The administrator of that cluster is concerned about running OpenAFS
and does not like to
On Thu, 27 Oct 2005, E. Chris Garrison wrote:
There seems to be no way to stop and restart the afsd on Solaris.
Try this:
#cd /
#umount /afs
#/usr/vice/etc/afsd -shutdown
#modunload `modinfo | grep afs`
to shutdown the client.
I also use
# /usr/afs/bin/bos shutdown localhost -localauth
#
On Thu, Oct 27, 2005 at 12:01:39PM -0700, Coy Hile wrote:
On Thu, 27 Oct 2005, E. Chris Garrison wrote:
There seems to be no way to stop and restart the afsd on Solaris.
Try this:
#cd /
#umount /afs
#/usr/vice/etc/afsd -shutdown
#modunload `modinfo | grep afs`
to shutdown the
On Thu, 27 Oct 2005, E. Chris Garrison wrote:
Thanks for the suggestions, Coy.
It doesn't complain about any of those, but the afsd processes are
still running and 'modinfo' still shows the module.
I've seen the same thing here on my systems. When the processes are stuck
(I think they're
How about not running the afs client on the servers. Will cut
down on overhead and you won't have that pesky problem.
-John
On Thu, Oct 27, 2005 at 02:11:14PM -0500, E. Chris Garrison wrote:
On Thu, Oct 27, 2005 at 12:01:39PM -0700, Coy Hile wrote:
On Thu, 27 Oct 2005, E. Chris Garrison
On Thu, 27 Oct 2005, John Lockard wrote:
How about not running the afs client on the servers. Will cut
down on overhead and you won't have that pesky problem.
-John
Good idea, but doesn't quite work that way in a lot of cases; the machine
doing file service may also run services that need
