Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Swap | Date | Wed, 21 Nov 2001 11:17:00 +0000 (GMT) | From | Alan Cox <> |
| |
> It is not a design bug - it is a design tradeoff. A stateful > server might work if you have years of uptime or at least > no unplanned downtime. But such implementations tend to force > clients to remount if the server ever go down. That may > be really annoying if you're accessing lots of servers.
NFS is at best "imitation stateless". You can do good stateful servers that recover across both client and server machine failure. You can do far better with them than with NFS - its just a bit harder.
Alan - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |