From owner-freebsd-current Wed Apr 21 10:49:17 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from cygnus.rush.net (cygnus.rush.net [209.45.245.133]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADD2615886 for ; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 10:47:55 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from bright@rush.net) Received: from localhost (bright@localhost) by cygnus.rush.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id NAA04155; Wed, 21 Apr 1999 13:01:43 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 13:01:41 -0500 (EST) From: Alfred Perlstein To: Matthew Dillon Cc: Kevin Day , current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Alright, who's the smart alleck that fixed NFS this last week? :) , WAS: Re: solid NFS patch #6 avail for -current - need tester In-Reply-To: <199904211722.KAA06827@apollo.backplane.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Wed, 21 Apr 1999, Matthew Dillon wrote: > : > :I would just like to say, that unlike certain zealots of other operating > :systems I've always been a bit hesitant to recommend FreeBSD over > :solaris because of this one factor (NFS). > : > :It now seems I can't think of a single reason, (I'm much more a > :cluster fan than an SMP fan) SMP just doesn't buy you enough to > :justify putting all your eggs in one basket... > : > :-Alfred > > Heh. We still do not have file locking over NFS. That's a major piece. > In general, though, I think FreeBSD's NFS is shaping up pretty well. It > is certainly much, much better then any other OS out there except > solaris. File locking over a stateless filesystem is just plain icky. Supposedly someone is working on client side locking, and I definetly will take a look at it just out of interest, not that i think i have a chance of implementing it. -Alfred To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message