From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sun May 27 11:59:37 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5462106564A for ; Sun, 27 May 2012 11:59:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from Martin.Birgmeier@aon.at) Received: from email.aon.at (smtpout03.highway.telekom.at [195.3.96.115]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 050AF8FC12 for ; Sun, 27 May 2012 11:59:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 19809 invoked from network); 27 May 2012 11:59:29 -0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.0 (2007-05-01) on WARSBL605.highway.telekom.at X-Spam-Level: Received: from 91-115-52-194.adsl.highway.telekom.at (HELO gandalf.xyzzy) ([91.115.52.194]) (envelope-sender ) by smarthub79.res.a1.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP for ; 27 May 2012 11:59:27 -0000 Received: from mizar-v1.xyzzy (mizar-v1.xyzzy [192.168.1.51]) by gandalf.xyzzy (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q4RBwt0P022102; Sun, 27 May 2012 13:59:08 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from Martin.Birgmeier@aon.at) Message-ID: <4FC21702.6070005@aon.at> Date: Sun, 27 May 2012 13:58:58 +0200 From: Martin Birgmeier User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120502 Thunderbird/12.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrey Simonenko References: <201205200810.q4K8A4KP087730@freefall.freebsd.org> <20120522080456.GA40365@pm513-1.comsys.ntu-kpi.kiev.ua> In-Reply-To: <20120522080456.GA40365@pm513-1.comsys.ntu-kpi.kiev.ua> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: kern/136865: [nfs] [patch] NFS exports atomic and on-the-fly atomic updates X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 27 May 2012 11:59:37 -0000 Hi Andrey, One more question: I am running 8.3, 9.0, and 7.4 on various machines. Do you have patches for these versions, too? Regards, Martin On 05/22/12 10:04, Andrey Simonenko wrote: > Hello, > > On Sun, May 20, 2012 at 08:10:04AM +0000, Martin Birgmeier wrote: >> The following reply was made to PR kern/136865; it has been noted by GNATS. >> >> From: Martin Birgmeier >> To: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org, simon@comsys.ntu-kpi.kiev.ua >> Cc: >> Subject: Re: kern/136865: [nfs] [patch] NFS exports atomic and on-the-fly >> atomic updates >> Date: Sun, 20 May 2012 10:04:01 +0200 >> >> Dear Andrey, >> >> It seems that you have done some great work here, and I would really >> like to see this integrated into the core FreeBSD distribution (I was >> the submitter of http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/131342). >> >> I would like to try out your patches and have two questions: >> >> - Do your patches support multiple zfs sharenfs specifications as >> proposed in http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=147881 (I am >> using this)? > The exports(5) manual page says that address specifications must be specified > after options. The nfs.exports(5) file format allows to use options after > address specifications, so they can overwrite previously specified options. > > It is possible to specify all settings for one file system in one line, > no ';' like separators are required. > > For example line: > > /fs -ro -sec krb5 1.1.1.1 -nfsv4 no -rw 2.2.2.2 -sec sys -nfsv4 yes 3.3.3.3 > > will be translated to ("nfse -t ..." output): > > Pathname /fs > Export specifications: > -rw -sec sys -maproot=-2:-2 -host 3.3.3.3 > -rw -sec krb5 -maproot=-2:-2 -nfsv4 no -host 2.2.2.2 > -ro -sec krb5 -maproot=-2:-2 -host 1.1.1.1 > >> >> - Could you give a concise list of incompatibilities (and even >> regressions if they should exist at all) of your solution compared to >> the standard one? - As to the advantages, I am already convinced. :-) > In short: if nfse is run in compatible mode with mountd ("nfse -C ..."), > then it is more compatible with exports(5) than mountd is. If one did > not follow rules of exports(5), then "nfse -C ..." can be incompatible > with mountd. > > If nfse is run in native nfs.export(5) configuration file format mode, > then logic of configuration looks like exports(5), but differs in some > places. > > So, when we speak about "incompatibilities" then it is necessary to > distinguish incompatibilities of "nfse native mode" vs mountd and > incompatibilities of "nfse compatible mode" vs mountd. > > I suggest to check whether "nfse -C ..." is compatible with mountd > using instructions described here: > > http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-fs/2010-May/008421.html > > You do not need to install anything or modify existent system for > testing. Can you try "nfse -Ct ..." and tell me whether "nfse -C ..." > is compatible enough with mountd (try correct configurations and > configurations with mistakes). > > I have list of difference somewhere, I'll try to find it. > >