[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: strange nfs problem
this is interesting check this out:
$ /bin/sparcv9/ls -atul
total 40
-rwsrwsrwx 1 nobody nobody 0 Dec 29 2065 bottom.htm
-rw-rw-rw- 1 nobody nobody 976 Jan 3 18:42 top.htm
-rw-rw-rw- 1 nobody nobody 337 Dec 28 20:47 left.htm
drwxrwxrwx 2 nobody nobody 4096 Dec 22 21:56 _vti_cnf
drwxrwxrwx 3 nobody nobody 4096 Dec 22 21:56 .
drwxrwxrwx 14 nobody nobody 4096 Dec 18 21:23 ..
$ cd _vti_cnf
$ /bin/sparcv9/ls -atul
total 32
-rw-rw-rw- 1 nobody nobody 691 Jan 3 18:42 top.htm
-rw-rw-rw- 1 nobody nobody 673 Dec 28 20:47 left.htm
drwxrwxrwx 2 nobody nobody 4096 Dec 22 21:56 .
drwxrwxrwx 3 nobody nobody 4096 Dec 22 21:56 ..
-rw-rw-rw- 1 nobody nobody 24 Dec 31 1969 bottom.htm
$
--Melinda :o)
"Jumping from 18-wheelers can be a health hazard, safety experts warn."
-The Wall Street Journal
On Tue, 4 Jan 2000, Kevin Ruderman wrote:
> I don't have your answer (sorry, checked under the christmas tree and all)
> but I can add a few points of info.
>
> >have any ideas ? Solaris 2.6 machines reports this file's last access
> >time as 12/31/69-- the day before the birth of UNIX.
>
> That comes from a time stamp of zero. It would be Jan 1 1970 but with
> a negative offset from GMT (like my -5 eastern) it becomes New Years
> Eve 1969.
>
>
> >nfs v3 spec is RFC1813 (http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1813.html). I guess
> >what we would be curious about from it is how the actual setting of the
> >atime works (does the client send a timestamp that the server is supposed
> >to blindly accept? does the client simply mention that it accessed the
> >file and the server updates things accordingly? ..or does the client even
> >know for sure that the atime is getting updated -- ie, it happens
> >automagically)
>
> I'm pretty sure it is automagic on the server. The server time is used
> and not the client time. I'm pretty when I did Y2K tests in odd, mixed
> time environments, the server time is what was stamped on the file.
>
> Rudi
>