From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 12 18:00:34 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A634106566C; Fri, 12 Feb 2010 18:00:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from amdmi3@amdmi3.ru) Received: from smtp.timeweb.ru (smtp.timeweb.ru [92.53.116.15]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10A838FC14; Fri, 12 Feb 2010 18:00:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [213.148.20.85] (helo=hive.panopticon) by smtp.timeweb.ru with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NfzoR-0003DB-BJ; Fri, 12 Feb 2010 21:00:19 +0300 Received: from hades.panopticon (hades.panopticon [192.168.0.32]) by hive.panopticon (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F0F7B862; Fri, 12 Feb 2010 21:00:32 +0300 (MSK) Received: by hades.panopticon (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 1E313B829; Fri, 12 Feb 2010 21:00:32 +0300 (MSK) Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2010 21:00:32 +0300 From: Dmitry Marakasov To: Oliver Fromme Message-ID: <20100212180032.GC94665@hades.panopticon> References: <201002102046.o1AKkrvj085173@lurza.secnetix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201002102046.o1AKkrvj085173@lurza.secnetix.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: NFS write corruption on 8.0-RELEASE X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2010 18:00:34 -0000 * Oliver Fromme (olli@lurza.secnetix.de) wrote: > This is an excerpt from Solaris' mount_nfs(1M) manpage: > > File systems that are mounted read-write or that con- > tain executable files should always be mounted with > the hard option. Applications using soft mounted file > systems may incur unexpected I/O errors, file corrup- > tion, and unexpected program core dumps. The soft > option is not recommended. > > FreeBSD's manual page doesn't contain such a warning, but > maybe it should. (It contains a warning not to use "soft" > with NFSv4, though, for different reasons.) Interesting, I'll try disabling it. However now I really wonder why is such dangerous option available (given it's the cause) at all, especially without a notice. Silent data corruption is possibly the worst thing to happen ever. However, without soft option NFS would be a strange thing to use - network problems is kinda inevitable thing, and having all processes locked in a unkillable state (with hard mounts) when it dies is not fun. Or am I wrong? > Also note that the "nolockd" option means that processes > on different clients won't see each other's locks. That > means that you will get corruption if they rely on > locking. I know - I have no processes that use locks on that filesystems. Also there's only a single client. -- Dmitry Marakasov . 55B5 0596 FF1E 8D84 5F56 9510 D35A 80DD F9D2 F77D amdmi3@amdmi3.ru ..: jabber: amdmi3@jabber.ru http://www.amdmi3.ru