> -----Original Message----- > From: Łukasz Tasz [mailto:lukasz@xxxxxxx] > Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2012 8:47 AM > To: Myklebust, Trond > Cc: Adrien Kunysz; linux-nfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: nfs performance - idea. > > Hi, thanks a lot for answer, > > looks then even better! so to be 100% sure it good to traverse whole path > and open directory content. No. All you really need is the opendir(). If you want to make your own hack, all you need is a program that does something along the lines of DIR* p = opendir("."); if (p) closedir(p); > One remark, since I did not mentioned it, I'm using NFSv3, is this behavior > same in NFSv3 and NFSv4? Yes. It is a consequence of the NFS close-to-open caching model, which is common to all versions of NFS. > thanks & regards > Lukasz Tasz > Łukasz Tasz > > > 2012/11/29 Myklebust, Trond <Trond.Myklebust@xxxxxxxxxx>: > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: linux-nfs-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:linux-nfs- > >> owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Lukasz Tasz > >> Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2012 4:41 AM > >> To: Adrien Kunysz > >> Cc: linux-nfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > >> Subject: Re: nfs performance - idea. > >> > >> Any idea on this topic? > >> > >> Can I assume that "touch" could be interface for triggering > >> synchronising client state with server state? > >> > > > > 'ls' is better. All opendir() calls will trigger a revalidation of the directory > cache. > > > > > >> many thanks for help! > >> regards > >> Lukasz Tasz > >> > >> > >> 2012/11/14 Adrien Kunysz <adk@xxxxxxxxx>: > >> > On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 1:38 PM, Łukasz Tasz <lukasz@xxxxxxx> wrote: > >> >> Hi all, > >> >> > >> >> I would like to consult some idea with you, > >> >> > >> >> Problem: > >> >> I have two processes which are doing some actions and one of the > >> >> action is done on a shared file system. > >> >> Issue is that this thing could be done only by one process, and > >> >> for this issue, locking mechanism is implemented. > >> >> Problem is that while one process is releasing lock, second one is > >> >> informed that file processing is finished, but unfortunately files > >> >> does not exists in context of second process. > >> >> Two processes are executed on two different hosts. NFS share is > >> >> mounted in a standard way, no special flag. > >> >> Problem I guess is with caches, lookupcache=none solves the > >> >> problem, but also causes others :) - performance. > >> >> > >> >> I know, it not possible to have all things at once - no complains. > >> >> But simple idea is that inside second process after notification > >> >> that files are generated execute touch function on directory which > >> >> holds files, This will cause unnecessary update of modification > >> >> date, but as a side effect I noticed that also file gets visible > >> >> immediately on client hosts. > >> >> > >> >> That's why my question is if this is expected and reasonable > behaviour? > >> >> At the end I'm looking for kind of 'sync' command which will cause > >> >> synchronization of directories content inside client and server > >> >> something like flush() - but in NFS it's more complex. > >> > > >> > Doesn't fsync(2) do what you want? If not, can you explain why? > >> > > >> >> thanks in advance for help, > >> >> > >> >> regards > >> >> Lukasz > >> -- > >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" > >> in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More > majordomo > >> info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html ��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{��w��� jg��� �����ݢj����G���� ���j:+v���w�m������w�������h�����٥
