RE: locking errors

New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Attachment view

From: Boris Z. (boris@conley.com)
Date: 10/07/98-06:36:55 PM Z


Message-ID: <01BDF210.B2C90940.boris@conley.com>
From: "Boris Z." <boris@conley.com>
Subject: RE: locking errors
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 16:36:55 -0700



On Wednesday, October 07, 1998 1:17 PM, Carl Beame [SMTP:beame@mail1.tinet.ie] wrote:
> 
> I have not received any message from the NFS V4 list today, so I am
> slow in responding ... Anyway I had someone send me todays messages...
> 
> >
> >If one has not implemented lease state in stable storage, then a
> >default lease time of one minute seems optimal.  I can't envision it
> >being practical for clients to reclaim leases in less than a minute,
> >and I can't envision those clients that had no leases before server
> >reboot being happy with more than a minute of artificial delay.
> >
> 
> Ok, given a lease interval of 60 seconds, I would probably cause my
> client to renew its leases after 30 seconds ...
> 
> Just running a simple email program causes 8 file locks to be active
> on the server. So given 1000 PC clients all doing NOTHING but have the
> email program running in the background there are 8000 file locks,
> each being renewed every 30 seconds or 267 renewals a second. Does
> anyone see a problem with this?
> 
>
We do. A client should be able to renew all locks with a single request.


New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Attachment view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : 03/04/05-01:46:31 AM Z CST