From: "J. Bruce Fields" Subject: Re: inode caching Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 09:59:35 -0400 Message-ID: <20080528135935.GA17606@fieldses.org> References: <1211835499.3904.231.camel@hurina> <483C031B.80601@redhat.com> <1211902848.3904.279.camel@hurina> <483C4E61.7020102@redhat.com> <0BF144BC-6CBB-49FA-8F49-D765FB58AF5E@iki.fi> <483CEFD5.8050507@panasas.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Timo Sirainen , Peter Staubach , linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org To: Benny Halevy Return-path: Received: from mail.fieldses.org ([66.93.2.214]:40850 "EHLO fieldses.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750855AbYE1OAA (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 May 2008 10:00:00 -0400 In-Reply-To: <483CEFD5.8050507@panasas.com> Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 08:38:29AM +0300, Benny Halevy wrote: > On May. 27, 2008, 22:13 +0300, Timo Sirainen wrote: > > I'd still like to understand why exactly this happens though. Maybe > > there's a chance that this is just a bug in the current NFS > > implementation so I could keep using my current code (which is > > actually very difficult to break even with stress testing, so if this > > doesn't get fixed on kernel side I'll probably just leave my code as > > it is). I guess I'll start debugging the NFS code to find out what's > > really going on. > > My guess would be that the new incarnation of the inode generates the > same filehandle as the old one, not just the same inode number. That sounds like a server bug (either in the server itself, or the filesystem it's exporting); the generation number is supposed to prevent this. --b.