From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Apr 4 19:14:38 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B41A4106566C for ; Mon, 4 Apr 2011 19:14:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from scrappy@hub.org) Received: from hub.org (hub.org [200.46.204.220]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FB228FC12 for ; Mon, 4 Apr 2011 19:14:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from maia.hub.org (maia-5.hub.org [200.46.204.29]) by hub.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C4CC3250A96; Mon, 4 Apr 2011 16:14:37 -0300 (ADT) Received: from hub.org ([200.46.204.220]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.29]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 94544-02; Mon, 4 Apr 2011 19:14:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: by hub.org (Postfix, from userid 1002) id DC5CA3250A90; Mon, 4 Apr 2011 16:14:36 -0300 (ADT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hub.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C69CE3250A7E; Mon, 4 Apr 2011 16:14:36 -0300 (ADT) Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2011 16:14:36 -0300 (ADT) From: "Marc G. Fournier" To: Chuck Swiger In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <0F56F33B-C492-4723-B7EC-713AD64E856C@mac.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 7-STABLE NFS: fatal: "select lock: Permission denied" X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2011 19:14:38 -0000 On Mon, 4 Apr 2011, Chuck Swiger wrote: > On Apr 4, 2011, at 11:58 AM, Marc G. Fournier wrote: >>> Be careful; multiple access from different processes even on a single host can still run into locking issues against NFS filesystems, or data corruption if locking isn't available. You're most at risk with local delivery to an mbox-style INBOX; delivery to maildir-style INBOX is much safer even on NFS without locking. >> >> In my case, I have postfix+cyrus-imapd ... > > OK-- Cyrus IMAP uses a variant of maildir, so you're relatively safe > even if locking is not available. So, just to get this clear ... If I were to boot a diskless station using an NFS backend, then that instance would be prone to corruption since lockd wouldn't work, even though the only processes handling the files on that mount? And this may be where I'm mis-understanding things: Does rpc.lockd work at the process level or file system? For instance, in my test case, I'm trying to operate within a jail ... does the rpc.lockd runnig at the primary OS level handle communications between client<->server, irrelevent of whether the process is running in a jail or not? ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Hosting Solutions S.A. scrappy@hub.org http://www.hub.org Yahoo:yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ:7615664 MSN:scrappy@hub.org