[OpenAFS-devel] Re: Breaking callbacks on unlink

[Andrew Deason]

On Wed, 25 Jan 2012 23:04:57 -0500
Derrick Brashear <shadow@gmail.com> wrote:

> > With this particular issue, again, there are two irreconcilable desired
> > behaviors:
> >
> >  - when accessing a legacy/misbehaving fileserver, yield an error after
> >   N seconds of no progress
> >
> >  - when accessing a legacy/misbehaving fileserver, hang forever in the
> >   face of no progress
> 
> I don't think anyone wants this.

I saw some emails to you today that sounded like someone wanted it :)

But sure, some people may want something like that. Some people want
hardmount. (Not saying we need an option for that at this time or
anything, though.)

> > I believe/assume what is being considered "right" is the latter
> > option.
> 
> ?

I definitely heard some advocacy for this the last time we were arguing
about this (how the fileserver-side should make this determination,
which is true, but...). But yeah, this isn't what went in.

> > And, although sometimes it seems like this idea is
> > unfathomable to some people in the community, some people _do_ exist
> > that do not place cache consistency at their highest priority.
> 
> The problem there, to me, is only when those people wish to
> participate in the global AFS namespace, which is a second issue here,
> the "play nice or go home" issue.

Well, I was talking about idledead stuff here, specifically client
behavior, which isn't going to screw up another client. I think that
matters much more when you're talking about server behavior, in which
case, yes, certainly.

-- 
Andrew Deason
adeason@sinenomine.net