ENOENT vs ESTALE on NFS

Bug #977999 reported by Shen Chen on 2012-04-10
14
This bug affects 2 people
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
flufl.lock
High
Barry Warsaw

Bug Description

This probably affects many routines in flufl.lock.
On NFS, one should expect ESTALE instead of ENOENT, when file is deleted.

However, on some Linux versions, ENOENT is reported, which is the wrong behavior.

references:
http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=4783
http://www.dovecot.org/list/dovecot-cvs/2011-April/018699.html

Barry Warsaw (barry) wrote :

It seems safe to catch both ESTALE and ENOENT, right?

Changed in flufl.lock:
status: New → In Progress
importance: Undecided → High
assignee: nobody → Barry Warsaw (barry)
milestone: none → 2.3

It has been over two years. I can't remember the slightest about my
readings on this topic.

We did have problem on NFS on CentOS 5.x, and
I traced down to ESTALE/ENOENT.

I need to refresh my memory and see if
we resolved the problem by catching both.

shenchen

On 2014-09-24
03:16, Barry Warsaw wrote:

> It seems safe to catch both ESTALE and
ENOENT, right?
>
> ** Changed in: flufl.lock
> Status: New => In
Progress
>
> ** Changed in: flufl.lock
> Importance: Undecided =>
High
>
> ** Changed in: flufl.lock
> Assignee: (unassigned) => Barry
Warsaw (barry)
>
> ** Changed in: flufl.lock
> Milestone: None => 2.3
>

> --
> You received this bug notification because you are subscribed
to the bug
> report.
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/977999
>
>
Title:
> ENOENT vs ESTALE on NFS
>
> Status in An NFS-safe file-based
lock library for Python.:
> In Progress
>
> Bug description:
> This
probably affects many routines in flufl.lock.
> On NFS, one should
expect ESTALE instead of ENOENT, when file is deleted.
>
> However, on
some Linux versions, ENOENT is reported, which is the
> wrong
behavior.
>
> references:
> http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=4783
>
http://www.dovecot.org/list/dovecot-cvs/2011-April/018699.html
>
> To
manage notifications about this bug go to:
>
https://bugs.launchpad.net/flufl.lock/+bug/977999/+subscriptions

Barry Warsaw (barry) wrote :

Cool, thanks. Yeah, sorry it's been so long on this bug. I haven't touched flufl.lock in ages, but I'm now working on an update, and plan to release something new in a few days.

Barry Warsaw (barry) wrote :

I committed the fix to catch both errors, but if this turns out not to be a good idea, please re-open this bug!

Changed in flufl.lock:
status: In Progress → Fix Committed
Barry Warsaw (barry) on 2014-09-25
Changed in flufl.lock:
status: Fix Committed → Fix Released
To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  Edit
Everyone can see this information.

Duplicates of this bug

Other bug subscribers

Remote bug watches

Bug watches keep track of this bug in other bug trackers.