Le 30 mars 08 à 15:57, Kyle McDonald a écrit :

> Fred Oliver wrote:
>>
>> Marion Hakanson wrote:
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
>>>> I am having trouble destroying a zfs file system (device busy) and
>>>> fuser
>>>> isn't telling me who has the file open: . . .
>>>> This situation appears to occur every night during a system test.
>>>> The  only
>>>> peculiar operation on the errant file system is that another system
>>>> NFS
>>>> mounts it with vers=2 in a non-global zone, and then halts that
>>>> zone. I
>>>> haven't been able to reproduce the problem outside the test.
>>>
>>> If you have a filesystem shared-out (exported) on an NFS-server,
>>> you'll get
>>> this kind of behavior.  No client need have it mounted.  You must
>>> first do
>>> a "unshare /files/custfs/cust12/2053699a" in your example before  
>>> trying
>>> to unmount it.
>>
>> Thanks, Marion.
>>
>> (a) This doesn't help in this case. ??
>>
>> # unshare /files/custfs/cust12/2053699a
>> nfs unshare: /files/custfs/cust12/2053699a: not shared
>> # zfs umount files/custfs/cust12/2053699a
>> cannot unmount '/files/custfs/cust12/2053699a': Device busy
>>
> In this case you may need to use 'zfs unshare', since I don't know if
> 'unshare' can unshare a ZFS that was sared by 'zfs share'.
>> (b) The unshare clearly isn't necessary in the vast majority of other
>> cases. I mean that the pattern of zfs_create, mount in zone, zone
>> shutdown, zfs destroy works almost all of the time. What would be
>> different in this case?
>>
> I don't know why thar case would work some times. In my experience  
> with
> UFS, having the fs shared out, *always* kept it busy when trying to
> unmount it.
>


I think the zfs umount will first issue the unshare under the cover.

I've manage to find processes holding a reference  by looking at all  
environments
and grepring for the mount point. It's not a catch all though and I  
don't know why.

-r

>  -Kyle
>
>> ---
>>
>> Separately:
>> -- lsof returns no references to this file system
>> -- this file system is a clone, not that it should matter.
>> -- zfs properties are attached.
>>
>> Fred
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> zfs-discuss mailing list
>> zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
>> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
>
> _______________________________________________
> zfs-discuss mailing list
> zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Reply via email to