Date: Fri, 6 Mar 1998 08:58:20 -0500 (EST) From: "Viren R. Shah" <viren@rstcorp.com> To: Snob Art Genre <benedict@echonyc.com> Cc: stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re:-stable suitable for small-enterprise NFS server? Message-ID: <199803061358.IAA24167@rstcorp.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.3.96.980305140234.27626A-100000@echonyc.com> References: <Pine.GSO.3.96.980305140234.27626A-100000@echonyc.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>>>>> "Ben" == Snob Art Genre <benedict@echonyc.com> writes: Ben> I can't imagine that this would be the case . . . but are there any NFS Ben> issues I should know about before building a ~12-user -stable NFS box? I had asked a similar question a while back (couple of weeks ago). You can check the mailing list archives. The gist of it was: 1. Always use nfs v2 mounts -- use mountd with the -2 flag, and expressly tell nfs clients to use nfs v2 mounts, for e.g. in solaris use the "vers=2" option in vfstab(?). 2. nfs v3 is more unreliable than nfs v2, at least in FreeBSD 3. Get a decent card (Intel Ether Express is a good one right now). Unfortunately, we're stuck with a 3com 3c905 (vx0), which seems to work ok so far, but doesn't give great performance. >From my testing so far, with a 2.2.5-STABLE (980303-SNAP) nfs server: 1. SunOS 4.1.x clients : very reliable. 2. Solaris 2.5.1: still testing 3. AIX and Linux: will be testing. Ben> Ben Viren -- Viren R. Shah "Creeping featurism is a disease, fatal if not treated promptly" -- Don Norman in _The Design of Everyday Things_ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199803061358.IAA24167>