> >>>>> " " == Oleg Drokin <green@namesys.com> writes:
>
> > Trod, do you think that'll work or should some other non-ext2
> > fs be tried?
>
> Ext2 should work fine: I've never seen any problems such as that which
> Stephan describes, and certainly not with 2.4.18 clients.
>
> In any case, any occurence of an ESTALE error *must* first have
> originated from the server. The client itself cannot determine that a
> filehandle is stale.
Next try:
I have now in addition to the /backup and /mnt reiserfs exports created another
ext2 export. First test case:
mount /backup, mount the ext2 fs on /test, then mount /mnt, do i/o on /mnt and
umount /mnt.
After that everything works! /test works _and_ /backup works!
Second test case: (server and client have several network cards, so I can mount
on other ips as well)
mount /backup, mount /mnt on ip1, mount /test on ip2 (from same server). do i/o
on /mnt and umount /mnt.
After that /test works, but/backup is stale.
Conclusion: reiserfs has a problem being nfs-mounted as the only fs to a
client. If you add another fs (here ext2) mount, then even reiserfs is happy.
The problem is originated at the server side.
Any ideas for a fix?
Regards,
Stephan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/