On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 12:33:49PM -0800, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
> Off the top of my head, the "vos release" workflows I deal with all
> involve adding new data, not removing any. [0] So, in some cases it
> is prudent to send a best-effort notification to potential consumers
> that they may
Hi Bruce,
Off the top of my head, the "vos release" workflows I deal with all involve
adding new data, not removing any. [0] So, in some cases it is prudent to send
a best-effort notification to potential consumers that they may experience
a pause in access, there's not a real need to
The one other offlist response I got was that behavior can depend on the
client.
I guess what I'd really be most interested in is users' perspectives: is
a "vos release" something you do you routinely with no special
precautions? Or do you have to, say, schedule them for times when
client
On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 08:09:40AM +, spacefrogg-open...@spacefrogg.net
wrote:
> My answer is pure speculation and inference from my partial knowledge of AFS
> and Linux.
>
> On a readonly volume, the cache manager doesn't track individual files. It
> just keeps a backpointer to the whole
My answer is pure speculation and inference from my partial knowledge of AFS
and Linux.
On a readonly volume, the cache manager doesn't track individual files. It just
keeps a backpointer to the whole volume. So, when the readonly volume is
updated, files from it will be refetched when read
Is there a better forum for this kind of question? I'm most interested
in the case where an in-use file is absent in a new version.
Summarizing a few points from a side conversation from Matt Benjamin.
(But any misunderstandings are mine, as my only AFS experience is purely
as a user 20+ years
