Re: [PATCH RFC 1/1] nfsd: Initial implementation of NFSv4 Courteous Server

[dai.ngo@oracle.com]

On 6/16/21 9:32 AM, Chuck Lever III wrote:
>> On Jun 16, 2021, at 12:02 PM, J. Bruce Fields <bfields@fieldses.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 03, 2021 at 02:14:38PM -0400, Dai Ngo wrote:
>>> . instead of destroy the client anf all its state on conflict, only destroy
>>> the state that is conflicted with the current request.
>> The other todos I think have to be done before we merge, but this one I
>> think can wait.
> I agree on both points: this one can wait, but the others
> should be done before merge.

yes, will do.

>
>
>>> . destroy the COURTESY_CLIENT either after a fixed period of time to release
>>> resources or as reacting to memory pressure.
>> I think we need something here, but it can be pretty simple.
> We should work out a policy now.
>
> A lower bound is good to have. Keep courtesy clients at least
> this long. Average network partition length times two as a shot
> in the dark. Or it could be N times the lease expiry time.
>
> An upper bound is harder to guess at. Obviously these things
> will go away when the server reboots. The laundromat could
> handle this sooner. However using a shrinker might be nicer and
> more Linux-y, keeping the clients as long as practical, without
> the need for adding another administrative setting.

Can we start out with a simple 12 or 24 hours to accommodate long
network outages for this phase?

Thanks,
-Dai

>
>
> --
> Chuck Lever
>
>
>