> I don't see the latter as a problem, since the file handles will be for
> "file as accessed via export 1" and "file as accessed via export 2".  I
> don't see anything wrong with having distinct file handles for the same
> file when the file is exported via two different exports; different
> exports are conceptually different filesystems, so I have no projblem
> with making them look different to clients.
> 
> The only surprise I see lurking is that writing the file via one
> filehandle will cause the file as seen by the other to change, which is
> not normally the case for different files.  I consider this by far the
> lesser breakage, as compared to the file going mysteriously RO on the
> RW mount (or, worse, the other way around).

Yep, it looks roughly like a process on another client wrote the file.
(Whether or not multiple file handles is ok is a debatable point. The
 "lively" thread on "Finding Hardlinks" in the current email archive
 of nfsv4@ietf.org found on www.nfsv4.org discusses this.)

The other poster said they were "not going to have multiple file handles",
which was why I couldn't figure out what they planned.

rick