[lkml]   [2002]   [Mar]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: BUG REPORT: kernel nfs between 2.4.19-pre2 (server) and 2.2.21-pre3 (client)
Stephan von Krawczynski wrote:

>On Mon, 11 Mar 2002 14:59:04 +0100
>Trond Myklebust <> wrote:
>>>>>>>" " == Oleg Drokin <> writes:
>> > Trod, do you think that'll work or should some other non-ext2
>> > fs be tried?
>>Ext2 should work fine: I've never seen any problems such as that which
>>Stephan describes, and certainly not with 2.4.18 clients.
>>In any case, any occurence of an ESTALE error *must* first have
>>originated from the server. The client itself cannot determine that a
>>filehandle is stale.
>Next try:
>I have now in addition to the /backup and /mnt reiserfs exports created another
>ext2 export. First test case:
>mount /backup, mount the ext2 fs on /test, then mount /mnt, do i/o on /mnt and
>umount /mnt.
>After that everything works! /test works _and_ /backup works!
>Second test case: (server and client have several network cards, so I can mount
>on other ips as well)
>mount /backup, mount /mnt on ip1, mount /test on ip2 (from same server). do i/o
>on /mnt and umount /mnt.
>After that /test works, but/backup is stale.
>Conclusion: reiserfs has a problem being nfs-mounted as the only fs to a
>client. If you add another fs (here ext2) mount, then even reiserfs is happy.
>The problem is originated at the server side.
>Any ideas for a fix?
>To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
>the body of a message to
>More majordomo info at
>Please read the FAQ at
Oleg will be back at work in 16 hours;-)


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:24    [W:0.104 / U:5.244 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site