| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 1011.1 | | SMURF::SCOTT | | Tue Mar 04 1997 08:50 | 11 |
| Ram,
Did you rename the domain directory, or move it out of /etc/fdmns?
Removing or moving the domain directory out of /etc/fdmns should
prevent access to the domain by advfsd.
An undocumented approach is to add an entry for the disk into the file
/var/opt/advfsd/disks.ignore (see note 881). This approach didn't work
on my system, though.
larry
|
| 1011.2 | | DECWET::MARTIN | | Tue Mar 04 1997 11:14 | 13 |
| Moving the domain directory out of /etc/fdmns will prevent advfsd from accessing
the domain. Renaming the domain directory but leaving it in /etc/fdmns will
still have advfsd try to access the domain.
The disks.ignore file only affects whether or not advfsd will look at a disk
from the standpoint of the disklabel (the "Devices & Volumes" view). If a disk
is in the disks.ignore file, but still has a link somewhere within the
/etc/fdmns directory hierarchy, advfsd will look at it for AdvFS domain
information.
All of this information should be documented in the release notes.
--Ken
|
| 1011.3 | | INDYX::ram | Ram Rao, PBPGINFWMY | Wed Mar 05 1997 15:00 | 5 |
| I had renamed it and was experiencing problems. I followed the suggestion
of .1 and .2 and moved the domain directory out of /etc/fdmns, and then
advfsd did not cause any further problems.
Thanks.
|
| 1011.4 | | KITCHE::schott | Eric R. Schott USG Product Management | Sun Mar 09 1997 05:58 | 5 |
| Hi
I think this should be ipmt'd, as it should not crash the system
under any senario...
|
| 1011.5 | please send crash-data file to CANASTA | HAN::HALLE | Volker Halle MCS @HAO DTN 863-5216 | Sun Mar 09 1997 22:42 | 16 |
| Ram,
if you still have the crash-data file available, could you please send
it to the CANASTA Mail Server using the following command:
# Mail -s "Diagnose Case=ADVFS_1011 Customer=notes_on_decwet"
[email protected] < crash-data.n
This will make sure, that at least the crash footprint gets documented
in the CANASTA crash database.
Thanks,
Volker.
PS: To learn more about CANASTA, please read note TURRIS::DIGITAL_UNIX 8919
|
| 1011.6 | I think this is what is happening | CSC32::RUTSCHOW | Jack of all trades, master of none | Fri Mar 14 1997 15:44 | 9 |
| If it is what I think it is, I have worked on these crashes and
engineering is aware of it. What is happening is you have one process
that hit the damaged domain and panics it, but right on it's heel is
another process trying to do the samething, it tries to panic the
domain, can't because the domain is already paniced and panics the
system... I think it won't happen if the first one is all the way
through the code before the second starts on it's journey...
dale
|