Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 24 Aug 2007 11:09:14 -0400 | From | Ric Wheeler <> | Subject | Re: NFS hang + umount -f: better behaviour requested. |
| |
J. Bruce Fields wrote: > On Tue, Aug 21, 2007 at 02:50:42PM -0400, John Stoffel wrote: > >> Not in my experience. We use NetApps as our backing NFS servers, so >> maybe my experience isn't totally relevant. But with a mix of Linux >> and Solaris clients, we've never had problems with soft,intr on our >> NFS clients. >> >> We also don't see file corruption, mysterious executables failing to >> run, etc. >> >> Now maybe those issues are raised when you have a Linux NFS server >> with Solaris clients. But in my book, reliable NFS servers are key, >> and if they are reliable, 'soft,intr' works just fine. >> > > The NFS server alone can't prevent the problems Peter Staubach refers > to. Their frequency also depends on the network and the way you're > using the filesystem. (A sufficiently paranoid application accessing > the filesystem could function correctly despite the problems caused by > soft mounts, but the degree of paranoia required probably isn't common.) > Would it be sufficient to insure that that application always issues an fsync() before closing any recently written/updated file? Is there some other subtle paranoid techniques that should be used?
ric
- 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/
| |