From owner-freebsd-hackers Sun Feb 27 12:32:13 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from apollo.backplane.com (apollo.backplane.com [216.240.41.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7213937B6DF for ; Sun, 27 Feb 2000 12:32:06 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dillon@apollo.backplane.com) Received: (from dillon@localhost) by apollo.backplane.com (8.9.3/8.9.1) id MAA67166; Sun, 27 Feb 2000 12:31:55 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dillon) Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2000 12:31:55 -0800 (PST) From: Matthew Dillon Message-Id: <200002272031.MAA67166@apollo.backplane.com> To: Ryan Thompson Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Annoying nfsrcv hangs References: Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG :ps al on my system shows multiple nfsrcv hangs on processes such as df, ls :and umount. Without any other characteristic problems, the nfs server :machine's exports all seemed to be working correctly. However, *one* and :only one of the mounts somehow went south. 'mount' on the client machine :shows: : :# mount | grep 10.0.0.2 :10.0.0.2:/usr on /f/usr :10.0.0.2:/devel on /f/devel :10.0.0.2:/bigfs on bigfs I assume the hangs are on the client? Not surprising if its a 3.2 system. A whole lot of NFS fixes went in between 3.2 and 3.4 so I recommend upgrading the client to the latest post 3.4 -stable. :That's verbatim... The mount was NOT done on bigfs... It was in fact done :on /f/bigfs. "We have secretly switched this SysAdmin's mountpoint with I don't know what is going on here, but it kinda sounds like cockpit trouble somewhere either in the exports line or the client's mount command. :The client nfs mounts are mounted intr, yet I still can't send a TERM or :KILL that these processes will catch. : intr is problematic but should basically work. If you are using a TCP NFS mount intr might not work until the tcp connection itself times out, but in either case will almost certainly not work if there is a protocol lockup issue (and there are several in 3.2). : :As you see, I haven't had any longevity problems up until now.. : :Has anything been built into -CURRENT to address these hangs? It has :plagued many in the past, and continues to do so. : : Yours truly, : Ryan Thompson Both -current and -stable have various NFS fixes that earlier releases did not. In general, NFS fixes for the -stable branch have been kept up to date with the work in -current, but -current ought to have much better NFS performance then stable. -Matt Matthew Dillon To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message