From owner-freebsd-stable Mon May 10 8: 2:35 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from angel.algonet.se (angel.algonet.se [194.213.74.112]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 769E614E00 for ; Mon, 10 May 1999 08:02:09 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mal@algonet.se) Received: (qmail 21064 invoked from network); 10 May 1999 17:02:07 +0200 Received: from kairos.algonet.se (194.213.74.18) by angel.algonet.se with SMTP; 10 May 1999 17:02:07 +0200 Received: (mal@localhost) by kairos.algonet.se (8.8.8+Sun/8.6.12) id RAA03718; Mon, 10 May 1999 17:02:07 +0200 (MET DST) Date: Mon, 10 May 1999 17:02:07 +0200 (MET DST) Message-Id: <199905101502.RAA03718@kairos.algonet.se> X-Authentication-Warning: kairos.algonet.se: mal set sender to mal@kairos.algonet.se using -f From: Mats Lofkvist To: stable@FreeBSD.ORG In-reply-to: (owner-freebsd-stable-digest@FreeBSD.ORG) Subject: Re: NFS question.. References: Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Well, I understand the issues (or at least I think so). But I am interested in fast, working NFS implementation (which I know could exist because Linux does it) and not in explanations (system administration is not my primary job). I can trade some bit of stability for performance in case of safe/unsafe NFS write modes. Linux NFS isn't perfect either; two Sun's (Solaris 2.5.1 and 2.6 respectively) mounting filesystems from a Linux NFS server at work have continous problems with files randomly being unreadable. Upgrading the Linux server from RedHat something based on 2.0.36 to Debian something based on 2.2.6 didn't seem to make any difference. _ Mats Lofkvist mal@algonet.se To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message