Re: [Gluster-devel] FUSE 2.7.3?

[Brent A Nelson]

The nfs-kernel-server only seems to have the ESTALE issue with idle 
clients cd'ed into the GlusterFS.  I have not encountered any other issue 
with nfs-kernel-server in recent GlusterFS builds.

However, the ESTALE issue is a bit of a showstopper, so I also test with 
Unfs3 user-mode NFS.  It doesn't have the ESTALE issue, but it does have 
the rm issue (also a showstopper), exactly as described in the 
discussion thread which led to the FUSE patch.

The last version I tested was from the April 3 TLA archive, however.

Thanks,

Brent

PS There were earlier rm -rf issues which affected both kernel-nfs and 
Unfs3 that did get fixed, but this one still persists (unless it was 
fixed after April 3).

On Thu, 1 May 2008, Anand Avati wrote:

> Brent,
> thanks for the pointer. We have been having that (similar/equivalent) fix
> in GlusterFS since a while. And from what I recollect, this change has made
> GlusterFS work fine over nfs-re-export (for solaris clients as well), and
> the issue currently being faced is the ESTALE error when you keep a shell
> idle for a while. Please correct me if otherwise.
>
> avati
>
> 2008/4/22 Brent A Nelson <address@hidden>:
>
> > Thanks, but it looks like I might as well stick with 2.7.2.  The patch is
> > actually for their fusexmp_fh.c example file, so the fix actually needs to
> > be made in all the client codes out there...
> >
> > On that note, GlusterFS dudes, could you please take a look at the small
> > patch at:
> > http://fuse.cvs.sourceforge.net/fuse/fuse/example/fusexmp_fh.c?r1=1.25&r2=1.26&view=patchand
> >  adjust the GlusterFS client code, accordingly? This should hopefully
> > eliminate the last known glitch with unfs3 reexport, which is that rm -rf
> > often doesn't work fully.
> >
> > Thanks,