Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 19 Nov 1997 09:03:28 -0500 | From | Bill Hawes <> | Subject | Re: update for 2.1.65 knfsd |
| |
H. Peter Anvin wrote: > > With these changes in place, it should be very rare (I'm tempted to say > > impossible :-)) to get a stale filehandle error except in the cases > > where a traditional nfs server would do so. Moving a file to a different > > directory or deleting it should result in a stale filehandle, but this > > is the correct behavior (I think). > > > > Is it? Or do you mean deleting or moving it locally? I suspect even > the latter (moving) case probably should access the file... > > I might try to write a test case for this one and test it out...
Hi Peter, The current NFS client goes to some length to ensure that dentries aren't busy before a rename, so that new filehandles will be obtained after the operation. Thus the client shouldn't ever see a stale filehandle message following the rename.
My comment about needing a new filehandle after a cross-directory rename was based on comments in the NFS client code, which implied that NFS servers generally supplied a different filehandle in such cases.
Regards, Bill
| |