From: Stevan Steve Allen (scallen@us.ibm.com)
Date: 09/10/02-09:44:05 AM Z
Subject: Client<-->Server using both NLM & NFSv4 Message-ID: <OF8CA20983.C3F0109E-ON87256C30.004DE089@boulder.ibm.com> From: "Stevan Steve Allen" <scallen@us.ibm.com> Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2002 07:44:05 -0700 A single client may have both NLM & NFSv4 sessions established with the same server. It was noted that a client NLM restart does not signify a client reboot. NFSv4 locks are still valid. Based on separate protocols, It would seem that an sm_notify does not mean the server should throw away NFSv4 locks, or visa versa for setclientid. This indicates the NFS server needs to differentiate (track) NLM & V4 locks... and server locking functions such as purge locks by client id needs enhanced so only the proper version of locks are purged. For a full client system restart, we believe there will be both sm_notify & setclientid issued to the server. And it takes both to clean up all locks. The NFSv4 locks may timeout when missing a setclientid, but nlm locks may not timeout if missing an sm_notify. Is anyone adopting the server approach that a lonely sm_notify -or- setclientid releases all lock versions? Thanks, Stevan C. Allen Show what you got and charm them with your weakness. If your adept at both, we're all jealous.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : 03/04/05-01:50:21 AM Z CST