Hi All,
Have a query, over which a definitive statement in standard material
seems to be hard to trace. Hope people on the list can throw some light
on this. Have a situation where, (this is all with nfs version 3)
- client asks for non-exclusive lock of a certain file handle. range
is the entire file.
- server grants the lock.
- client asks for an exclusive lock of the same file, entire file.
uses a different cookie than the first lock request.
- server denies the lock, as a exclusive lock cannot be granted on a
file that is already non-exclusively locked. (The only multiple locks
that can exists must all be non-exclusive).
- client asks to unlock the file.
- server grants the unlock.
- client starts the same process over.
The clients versions, that reported this behaviour include,
- Linux diablo 2.6.13-15.8-default
- SunOS csns28 5.9 Generic_112233-12 sun4u sparc
This seems to be fine and working as expected. But, in a situation
where, server has granted a non-exclusive lock to the client, and if
that is the only client holding a non-exclusive lock - Is/Can the server
be expected to allow the upgrade of non-exclusive lock to an exclusive
lock without going thro' a release of the non-exclusive lock ?
Any thoughts / inputs on this are welcome.
Thanks & Regards,
Madhan.
-------------------------------------------------------
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
NFS maillist - [email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs
On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 00:12 -0600, Madhan P wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Have a query, over which a definitive statement in standard material
> seems to be hard to trace. Hope people on the list can throw some light
> on this. Have a situation where, (this is all with nfs version 3)
>
> - client asks for non-exclusive lock of a certain file handle. range
> is the entire file.
> - server grants the lock.
> - client asks for an exclusive lock of the same file, entire file.
> uses a different cookie than the first lock request.
> - server denies the lock, as a exclusive lock cannot be granted on a
> file that is already non-exclusively locked. (The only multiple locks
> that can exists must all be non-exclusive).
> - client asks to unlock the file.
> - server grants the unlock.
> - client starts the same process over.
>
> The clients versions, that reported this behaviour include,
> - Linux diablo 2.6.13-15.8-default
> - SunOS csns28 5.9 Generic_112233-12 sun4u sparc
>
> This seems to be fine and working as expected. But, in a situation
> where, server has granted a non-exclusive lock to the client, and if
> that is the only client holding a non-exclusive lock - Is/Can the server
> be expected to allow the upgrade of non-exclusive lock to an exclusive
> lock without going thro' a release of the non-exclusive lock ?
Yes. Provided that nobody else holds a conflicting lock, the server
should allow you to upgrade or downgrade a byte range lock.
The cookie entry in the lock request shouldn't matter, but if the svid
or 'oh' field are different, then the server will treat it as being a
conflicting request.
Cheers,
Trond
-------------------------------------------------------
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
NFS maillist - [email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs