On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 07:15:15PM +0530, Anand Avati wrote: > I figure this is because you have http://review.gluster.com/231 in your > testing tree? That change leads to exactly the behavior you described. We > need to revisit the need for that patch. Shame on me, I did not remmeber I submitted that exact change! Indeed I now have both patches, the one that introduce the bug and the one that fixes it. This is riduclous. It is worth noting that in the meantime, NetBSD FUSE was changed in order to not use kernel name cache, and care for stale node has been implemented. Therefore I am now certain that http://review.gluster.com/231 is not desirable at all. -- Emmanuel Dreyfus manu@xxxxxxxxxx
