[lkml]   [2003]   [Nov]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: nfs_statfs: statfs error = 116

Trond Myklebust <> wrote on 11/14/2003 02:49:31

> >>>>> " " == Martin Knoblauch <> writes:
> > I accidentally run iozone on two clients with the output file
> > being the same and residing on the NFS Server. Pure luser
> > error, but it produced ESTALE pretty much reproducibly.
> Sure. This is a prime example of where ESTALE *is* appropriate. One
> NFS client is deleting a file on the server while the other is still
> using it.
> In the NFSv2/v3 protocols, the assumption is that filehandles are
> valid for the entire lifetime of the file on the server. IOW only
> "unlink()" can cause a valid filehandle to become stale. This is
> mainly because there is no notion of open()/close(), so the server
> would never be capable of determining when your client has stopped
> using the filehandle.
> If your 2 processes were running on the same machine, you would have
> seen the kernel temporarily rename your file to .nfsXXXXXX in order to
> work around the above problem. Delete that file, and you will generate
> ESTALE reproducibly too....
> Cheers,
> Trond

cool. Great explanation. Always good if you can get those that know into
talking :-)


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 13:58    [W:0.212 / U:1.224 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site