Doug Rabson wrote:
>
> This is probably because our server detects that the directory has been
> modified and rejects the solaris client's directory cookies.
I think we should not ever reject a client's cookie. Consider a local
program that scan the directoty with the getdirentries() syscall. The
offset in the directory is essentially the cookie that would be sent to
an NFS client. But we never "reject" the offset, and everyone is happy.
(Not to mention NFSv2, where we never reject a client's cookie too).
So, what we are trying to achieve by rejecting a NFSv3 client's cookie?
> Instead of
> recovering, the solaris client barfs. Its a solaris bug really
IMHO, it is very arguable. Why the client should "recover" after "stale
cookie" error, but should not recover after "stale filehandle" error?
How should it perform the recovery: If a reliable recovery is possible,
why it is not done on the server?
(After all, Sun know how NFSv3 should work, since they wrote the spec,
right? :-|)
Dima
Dima
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
