> On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 5:44 PM Andrew J. Romero <romero@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Hi > > > > This is a quick general NFS server question. > > > > Does the NFSv4x specification require or recommend that: the NFS server, > after some reasonable time, > > should / must close orphan / zombie open files ? > > Why should the server be responsible for a badly behaving client? It seems like > you are advocating for the world where a problem is hidden rather than solved. > But because bugs do occur and some customers want a quick solution, some > storage providers do have ways of dealing with releasing resources (like open > state) that the client will never ask for again. > > Why should we excuse bad user behaviour? For things like long running jobs > users have to be educated that their credentials must stay valid for the duration > of their usage. > > Why should we excuse poor application behaviour that doesn't close files? But in > a way we do, the OS will make sure that the file is closed when the application > exists without explicitly closing the file. So I'm curious how do you get in a state > with zombie? Don't automatically assume this is bad application behavior, though it may be behavior we don't all like, sometimes it may be for a reason. Applications may be keeping a file open to protect the file (works best when share deny modes are available, i.e. most likely a Windows client). Also, won't an executable be kept open for the lifetime of the process, especially if the executable is large enough that it will be paged in/out from the file? This assures the same executable is available for the lifetime of the process even if deleted and replaced with a new version. Now whether this kind of activity is desirable via NFS may be another question... Frank
