From owner-freebsd-hackers Sun Aug 20 12:46:55 1995 Return-Path: hackers-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.FreeBSD.org (8.6.11/8.6.6) id MAA14202 for hackers-outgoing; Sun, 20 Aug 1995 12:46:55 -0700 Received: from cs.weber.edu (cs.weber.edu [137.190.16.16]) by freefall.FreeBSD.org (8.6.11/8.6.6) with SMTP id MAA14189 for ; Sun, 20 Aug 1995 12:46:50 -0700 Received: by cs.weber.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1.1) id AA23045; Sun, 20 Aug 95 13:48:17 MDT From: terry@cs.weber.edu (Terry Lambert) Message-Id: <9508201948.AA23045@cs.weber.edu> Subject: Re: Making a FreeBSD NFS server To: taob@gate.sinica.edu.tw (Brian Tao) Date: Sun, 20 Aug 95 13:48:16 MDT Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: from "Brian Tao" at Aug 20, 95 03:16:12 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4dev PL52] Sender: hackers-owner@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk > > Be warned that, though Sun and SVR4 do this too, this is a cache > > coherency violation and can result in Bad Things Happening [...] > > I think it was Garrett who remarked that the whole idea of > stateless NFS was a gross violation of filesystem consistency. ;-) The whole idea of stateful NFS would be a gross violation of municipal power grid consistency. 8-). Unless you are running everything on the same box, it's impossible to provide inter-machine consistency guarantees. That's why NFS is the way it is. > > One alternative is to use NFSv3 on both the client and the server. > > This means going all BSD or including OSF/1, > > Does this include BSD/OS 2.0 as well? I lied (apparently). There are reliable async write guarantees, not coherency guarantees. The NFSv3 is not default with FreeBSD, and it's not there for BSDI at all as far as I know. Terry Lambert terry@cs.weber.edu --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.