On Aug 17, 2013, at 11:17 AM, O. Hartmann wrote: > On Sat, 17 Aug 2013 10:42:07 -0700 > Tim Kientzle <tim_at_kientzle.com> wrote: > >> >> On Aug 17, 2013, at 10:35 AM, O. Hartmann wrote: >> >>> On Sat, 17 Aug 2013 21:10:49 +0400 >>> Boris Samorodov <bsam_at_passap.ru> wrote: >>> >>>> 17.08.2013 13:36, O. Hartmann пишет: >>>> >>>>> I can reproduceable truncate the link in /etc/ to be NIL by typing >>>>> simply "reboot" when rebooting the box >>>> >>>> Does it make any difference if you use "shutdown -r" instead? >>>> >>> >>> Yes, when using "shutdown -r" the link isn't broken and the system >>> reboots and operates as expected. Only if I use the "quick and dirty >>> way" via "reboot" or after a crash when service named ahs already >>> been started the link is dead. If a crahs occurs BEFORE service >>> named has been started, the recovery is also operable - this is my >>> observation. >> >> Does "reboot" show the same problem If the system has been running >> for a while (at least 15 minutes or so)? > > Yes, of course. That's not good. After 15 minutes, the link contents should have been written all the way to disk, even on an idle system. It sounds like the sync process might not be running except at system shutdown. What filesystem are you using? ZFS? UFS/SU? SU+J? Kernel version? Can you reproduce this without named? That is: * create a symlink, * wait 15 minutes, * "reboot" Is the symlink broken? TimReceived on Sat Aug 17 2013 - 16:41:12 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:40 UTC