[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:0.019 / U:21.060 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site