On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 03:15:35PM +0000, Trond Myklebust wrote: > I'm open to other suggestions, but I'm having trouble finding one that > can scale correctly (i.e. not require per-client tracking), prevent > silent corruption (by causing clients to miss errors), while not > relying on optional features that may not be implemented by all NFSv3 > clients (e.g. per-file write verifiers are not implemented by *BSD). > > That said, it seems to me that to do nothing should not be an option, > as that would imply tolerating silent corruption of file data. So should we increment the boot verifier every time we discover an error on an asynchronous write? --b.
