From: Trond Myklebust Subject: Re: Should fcntl operations check attributes with the server when NFS shares are mounted noac? Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 09:26:55 -0500 Message-ID: <1140791215.3615.20.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> References: <20060223124255.GA29177@hmsendeavour.rdu.redhat.com> <1140711133.11831.27.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> <20060223192253.GG29177@hmsendeavour.rdu.redhat.com> <1140723567.7963.13.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> <43FE11F1.5040005@redhat.com> <1140725969.7963.17.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> <43FE2029.7040205@redhat.com> <1140733881.7963.31.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> <20060224140615.GA31881@hmsendeavour.rdu.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Cc: Peter Staubach , nfs@lists.sourceforge.net Return-path: Received: from sc8-sf-mx2-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.92] helo=mail.sourceforge.net) by sc8-sf-list2.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1FCdud-0007Z9-1Z for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 24 Feb 2006 06:27:15 -0800 Received: from pat.uio.no ([129.240.130.16] ident=7411) by mail.sourceforge.net with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.44) id 1FCduc-00075Q-Eo for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 24 Feb 2006 06:27:15 -0800 To: Neil Horman In-Reply-To: <20060224140615.GA31881@hmsendeavour.rdu.redhat.com> Sender: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Discussion of NFS under Linux development, interoperability, and testing. List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: On Fri, 2006-02-24 at 09:06 -0500, Neil Horman wrote: > This strikes in a somewhat simmilar fashion to the flock() function. For years > it just didn't work over NFS (and still IIRC doesn't), but a while ago we put in > a check so that it returned an appropriate error in the event that you tried to > flock a file over NFS. Perhaps what we need to do here is: Flock should now work over NFS. Try it. > 1) Fix the noac problem as previously described > 2) Add a check (simmilar to that of flock) such that attempting to set a lease > on a file over NFS results in a return of -ENOTSUPP or another appropriate > error. Why waste time doing (1) at all, since a "noac" mount usually means you are in a situation where (2) applies? How about instead we do (3) Fix the fcntl (2) manpage so that it mentions distributed filesystems and the caveats of using F_SETLEASE on them. Cheers, Trond ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ NFS maillist - NFS@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs