Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 19 Dec 2019 11:50:39 +0200
From:      Daniel Braniss <danny@cs.huji.ac.il>
To:        Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca>
Cc:        Richard P Mackerras <mack63richard@gmail.com>, "stable@freebsd.org" <stable@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: nfs lockd errors after NetApp software upgrade.
Message-ID:  <854B6E5A-C6BC-44B3-A656-FC9B8EF19881@cs.huji.ac.il>
In-Reply-To: <YQBPR0101MB1427F9BE658B9A46C7E08335DD520@YQBPR0101MB1427.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
References:  <EBC4AD74-EC62-4C67-AB93-1AA91F662AAC@cs.huji.ac.il> <YQBPR0101MB1427411AFE335E869B9CF022DD530@YQBPR0101MB1427.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> <0121E289-D2AE-44BA-ADAC-4814CAEE676F@cs.huji.ac.il> <CAGfybS-3Rvs57=oGFEfii_9a=aWxPr6dEq1Y1LqHbLXK1ZKmXA@mail.gmail.com> <YQBPR0101MB1427F9BE658B9A46C7E08335DD520@YQBPR0101MB1427.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help


> On 19 Dec 2019, at 02:22, Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca> wrote:
>=20
> Richard P Mackerras wrote:
>=20
>> Hi,
>> What software version is the NetApp using?
>> Is the exported volume big?
>> Is the vserver configured for 64bit identifiers?
>>=20
>> If you enable NFS V4.0 or 4.1 other NFS clients using defaults might =
mount NFSv4.x >unexpectedly after a reboot so you need to watch that.
> The FreeBSD client always uses NFSv3 mounts by default. To get NFSv4 =
you must
> explicitly specify the "nfsv4" or "vers=3D4" mount option. For =
NFSv4.1, you must
> also specify "minorversion=3D1=E2=80=9D.
>=20
> The Linux distros I am familiar with will use the highest NFS version =
supported by
> the server by default. (I suspect some are using NFSv4.1 without =
realizing it,
> which isn't necessarily bad.)
>=20
> nfsstat -m
> will show you which version is actually in use for both FreeBSD and =
Linux.
>=20
all mounts are nfsv3/tcp
the error is also appearing on freebsd-11.2-stable, I=E2=80=99m now =
checking if it=E2=80=99s also
happening on 12.1
btw, the NetApp version is 9.3P17

cheers,
	danny

> rick
>=20
> Cheers
>=20
> Richard
> (NetApp admin)
>=20
> On Wed, 18 Dec 2019 at 15:46, Daniel Braniss =
<danny@cs.huji.ac.il<mailto:danny@cs.huji.ac.il>> wrote:
>=20
>=20
>> On 18 Dec 2019, at 16:55, Rick Macklem =
<rmacklem@uoguelph.ca<mailto:rmacklem@uoguelph.ca>> wrote:
>>=20
>> Daniel Braniss wrote:
>>=20
>>> Hi,
>>> The server with the problems is running FreeBSD 11.1 stable, it was =
working fine for >several months,
>>> but after a software upgrade of our NetAPP server it=E2=80=99s =
reporting many lockd errors >and becomes catatonic,
>>> ...
>>> Dec 18 13:11:02 moo-09 kernel: nfs server fr-06:/web/www: lockd not =
responding
>>> Dec 18 13:11:45 moo-09 last message repeated 7 times
>>> Dec 18 13:12:55 moo-09 last message repeated 8 times
>>> Dec 18 13:13:10 moo-09 kernel: nfs server fr-06:/web/www: lockd is =
alive again
>>> Dec 18 13:13:10 moo-09 last message repeated 8 times
>>> Dec 18 13:13:29 moo-09 kernel: sonewconn: pcb 0xfffff8004cc051d0: =
Listen queue >overflow: 194 already in queue awaiting acceptance (1 =
occurrences)
>>> Dec 18 13:14:29 moo-09 kernel: sonewconn: pcb 0xfffff8004cc051d0: =
Listen queue >overflow: 193 already in queue awaiting acceptance (3957 =
occurrences)
>>> Dec 18 13:15:29 moo-09 kernel: sonewconn: pcb 0xfffff8004cc051d0: =
Listen queue >overflow: 193 already in queue awaiting acceptance =E2=80=A6=

>> Seems like their software upgrade didn't improve handling of NLM =
RPCs?
>> Appears to be handling RPCs slowly and/or intermittently. Note that =
no one
>> tests it with IPv6, so at least make sure you are still using IPv4 =
for the mounts and
>> try and make sure IP broadcast works between client and Netapp. I =
think the NLM
>> and NSM (rpc.statd) still use IP broadcast sometimes.
>>=20
> we are ipv4 - we have our own class c :-)
>> Maybe the network guys can suggest more w.r.t. why, but as I've =
stated before,
>> the NLM is a fundamentally broken protocol which was never published =
by Sun,
>> so I suggest you avoid using it if at all possible.
> well, at the moment the ball is on NetAPP court, and switching to =
NFSv4 at the moment is out of the question, it=E2=80=99s
> a production server used by several thousand students.
>=20
>>=20
>> - If the locks don't need to be seen by other clients, you can just =
use the "nolockd"
>>  mount option.
>> or
>> - If locks need to be seen by other clients, try NFSv4 mounts. Netapp =
filers
>>  should support NFSv4.1, which is a much better protocol that =
NFSv4.0.
>>=20
>> Good luck with it, rick
> thanks
>        danny
>=20
>> =E2=80=A6
>> any ideas?
>>=20
>> thanks,
>>       danny
>>=20
>> _______________________________________________
>> freebsd-stable@freebsd.org<mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> mailing =
list
>> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to =
"freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org<mailto:freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@=
freebsd.org>"
>=20
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-stable@freebsd.org<mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> mailing =
list
> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to =
"freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org<mailto:freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@=
freebsd.org>"




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?854B6E5A-C6BC-44B3-A656-FC9B8EF19881>