> On Feb 10, 2022, at 11:32 AM, J. Bruce Fields <bfields@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I was standing in the shower thinking.... > > We're now removing the persistent client record early, after the first > lease period expires, instead of waiting till the first lock conflict. > > That simplifies conflict handling. > > It also means that all clients lose their locks any time a crash or > reboot is preceded by a network partition of longer than a lease period. > > Which is what happens currently, so it's no regression. > > Still, I think it will be a common case that it would be nice to handle: > there's a network problem, and as a later consequence of the problem or > perhaps a part of addressing it, the server gets rebooted. There's no > real reason to prevent clients recovering in that case. > > Seems likely enough that it would be worth a little extra complexity in > the code that handles conflicts. > > So I'm no longer convinced that it's a good tradeoff to remove the > persistent client record early. Would it be OK if we make this change after the current work is merged? -- Chuck Lever
