Trond Myklebust wrote:
> Actually, the real problem would be dealing with something like
> unlink('foo') followed by open('foo', O_CREAT|O_EXCL). How do you ensure
> that a replay of those actions following a reboot is fully consistent in
> the face of some other client attempting an open('foo', O_CREAT) at the
> same time?
>
> The problem is that a number of directory operations involve exclusive
> semantics, and so cannot be replayed. The solution to this sort of
> problem is going to have to involve exclusive (i.e. write) directory
> delegations to ensure that whatever transactions one client performs
> cannot interfere with the transactions performed by another.
>
>
Well, a dumb question from me (borrowing Bruce's line :) ) ... even with
"sync" in place, when server rebooted, the RPC reply cache is gone. How
does linux server handle re-transmitted non-idempotent requests ?
-- Wendy
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper
from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going
mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future.
http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4
_______________________________________________
NFS maillist - [email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs
_______________________________________________
Please note that [email protected] is being discontinued.
Please subscribe to [email protected] instead.
http://vger.kernel.org/vger-lists.html#linux-nfs