From owner-freebsd-current Tue Mar 18 17: 0:52 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EF3A37B401 for ; Tue, 18 Mar 2003 17:00:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from Math.Berkeley.EDU (gold.Math.Berkeley.EDU [169.229.58.61]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8707943F93 for ; Tue, 18 Mar 2003 17:00:49 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from steve@Math.Berkeley.EDU) Received: from bootjack.math.berkeley.edu (root@bootjack.Math.Berkeley.EDU [169.229.58.46]) by Math.Berkeley.EDU (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h2J10ieB019857; Tue, 18 Mar 2003 17:00:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from bootjack.math.berkeley.edu (steve@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bootjack.math.berkeley.edu (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h2J10iUu001103; Tue, 18 Mar 2003 17:00:44 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from steve@bootjack.math.berkeley.edu) Received: (from steve@localhost) by bootjack.math.berkeley.edu (8.12.6/8.12.6/Submit) id h2J10hEu001102; Tue, 18 Mar 2003 17:00:43 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from steve) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 17:00:43 -0800 From: Steve Sizemore To: Terry Lambert Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: NFS file unlocking problem Message-ID: <20030319010042.GD875@math.berkeley.edu> Reply-To: Steve Sizemore References: <3E768C47.229C1DF0@mindspring.com> <20030318065716.GB99408@math.berkeley.edu> <3E76CC9A.BBAAED4A@mindspring.com> <20030318172237.GA320@math.berkeley.edu> <3E77A275.4F4B5B1F@mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3E77A275.4F4B5B1F@mindspring.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Tue, Mar 18, 2003 at 02:49:25PM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote: > Steve Sizemore wrote: > > I don't see now it could be "inter-program", since I've gone to great > > lengths to simplify it to a single program failing on a brand new file. > > Is the file ever open by a program on the NFS server itself? Not explicitly by me or anything that I'm aware of. The only way that it could be opened is if some daemon is sitting there waiting for a new file to appear and then opening it. Not likely. Even if it were, wouldn't the problem then also be seen when using a FreeBSD nfs client? > > > Oh, so that's what that meant. :-) But (see above) it's pretty clear > > to me that nothing else could have it locked. > > Then you aren't getting the error. 8-) 8-) 8-). But you're assuming that locking is working properly, and the only reason that it could hang is that there is a legitimate lock on the file. > > No, but this might be an important clue. The FreeBSD host has multiple > > (2) A Records in the DNS. In fact, I think that when it last worked, > > it had only a single A Record. > > Well, try undoing that change. I don't think that's it, though, > but it gives you a lever to pull. Not such an easy lever. I can't really undo that, because mail virtual hosting requires it. > > > > If so, try: > > > > > > sysctl -w net.inet.ip.check_interface=0 > > > > What does this do, just turn off checking? Can I do this on the > > running system, or do I need to put it into sysctl.conf and reboot? > > (BTW, from the man page - > > "The -w option has been deprecated and is silently ignored.") > > Use it on a running system. Ignore the warning. You didn't tell me what it does, but I very trustingly did it anyway. No effect. Oh, and I built and ran the locktest.c program you sent me. On a local file, it returns instantly the message "There is no lock that would block you!" I've run it three times on the NFS mounted FS and it has "hung" each time, long enough that I've gone away to do other things, but when I return, the program has terminated, and I get the same message. Right now I'm running under "time", so I'll see how long it actually took. I don't think that the values I enter for lock start, lock length, and whence are important. (Are they?) After about 40 minutes, the locktest running under time still hadn't returned, so I interrupted it. At least it died on interrupt, and didn't force me to kill the session. I think I'm going to have to build another 5.0 system on this same subnet so I can use it for testing. Steve -- Steve Sizemore , (510) 642-8570 Unix System Manager Dept. of Mathematics and College of Letters and Science University of California, Berkeley To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message