- Original Message -
From: Pranith Kumar Karampuri pkara...@redhat.com
To: Raghavendra Gowdappa rgowd...@redhat.com
Cc: Gluster Devel gluster-devel@gluster.org, Anand Avati
av...@gluster.org, Brian Foster
bfos...@redhat.com, Raghavendra Bhat rab...@redhat.com
Sent: Friday, July 4, 2014 5:39:03 PM
Subject: Re: regarding inode_link/unlink
On 07/04/2014 04:28 PM, Raghavendra Gowdappa wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Pranith Kumar Karampuri pkara...@redhat.com
To: Gluster Devel gluster-devel@gluster.org, Anand Avati
av...@gluster.org, Brian Foster
bfos...@redhat.com, Raghavendra Gowdappa rgowd...@redhat.com,
Raghavendra Bhat rab...@redhat.com
Sent: Friday, July 4, 2014 3:44:29 PM
Subject: regarding inode_link/unlink
hi,
I have a doubt about when a particular dentry_unset thus
inode_unref on parent dir happens on fuse-bridge in gluster.
When a file is looked up for the first time fuse_entry_cbk does
'inode_link' with parent-gfid/bname. Whenever an unlink/rmdir/(lookup
gives ENOENT) happens then corresponding inode unlink happens. The
question is, will the present set of operations lead to leaks:
1) Mount 'M0' creates a file 'a'
2) Mount 'M1' of same volume deletes file 'a'
M0 never touches 'a' anymore. When will inode_unlink happen for such
cases? Will it lead to memory leaks?
Kernel will eventually send forget (a) on M0 and that will cleanup the
dentries and inode. Its equivalent to a file being looked up and never
used again (deleting doesn't matter in this case).
Do you know the trigger points for that? When I do 'touch a' on the
mount point and leave the system like that, forget is not coming.
If I do unlink on the file then forget is coming.
I am not very familiar with how kernel manages its inodes. However, as Avati
has mentioned in another mail, you can force kernel to send forgets by
invalidating the inode. I think he has given enough details in another mail.
Pranith
Pranith
___
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@gluster.org
http://supercolony.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
