From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jul 9 03:17:39 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7D9037B401 for ; Wed, 9 Jul 2003 03:17:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from salmon.maths.tcd.ie (salmon.maths.tcd.ie [134.226.81.11]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6B21343F93 for ; Wed, 9 Jul 2003 03:17:38 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from iedowse@maths.tcd.ie) Received: from walton.maths.tcd.ie by salmon.maths.tcd.ie with SMTP id ; 9 Jul 2003 11:17:28 +0100 (BST) To: Oliver Fromme In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 09 Jul 2003 11:13:49 +0200." <200307090913.h699DnK3053575@lurza.secnetix.de> Date: Wed, 09 Jul 2003 11:17:27 +0100 From: Ian Dowse Message-ID: <200307091117.aa12894@salmon.maths.tcd.ie> cc: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: NFS problem FreeBSD vs NetApp Filer using tomcat / java X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Jul 2003 10:17:40 -0000 In message <200307090913.h699DnK3053575@lurza.secnetix.de>, Oliver Fromme write s: >Someone asked me off-list whether I use the "interruptible" >flag for the NFS mounts, and suggested switching it off. ... >It is my understanding that the interruptible flag has only >an effect when a signal is delivered to a process which is >blocked on NFS I/O. Or am I wrong? Yes, the interruptible flag should only have an effect when the process receives a signal while waiting on an NFS response. Maybe it is possible that the progess is sending itself a signal? NFS checks for SIGINT, SIGTERM, SIGHUP, SIGKILL and SIGQUIT. If you are using the -s/soft option then that is quite different - there are well-known effects where an unusually long delay from the server can trigger occasional EINTR errors. Ian