From owner-freebsd-stable  Fri Mar  6 06:00:12 1998
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA24277
          for freebsd-stable-outgoing; Fri, 6 Mar 1998 06:00:12 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG)
Received: from bigbrother ([206.29.49.2])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id GAA24252
          for <stable@freebsd.org>; Fri, 6 Mar 1998 06:00:06 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from vshah@rstcorp.com)
Received: (from uucp@localhost) by bigbrother (8.6.12/8.6.9) id JAA25302; Fri, 6 Mar 1998 09:53:51 -0500
Received: from fault.rstcorp.com(206.29.49.18) by bigbrother.rstcorp.com via smap (V2.0)
	id xma025299; Fri, 6 Mar 98 09:53:28 -0500
Received: (from vshah@localhost) by rstcorp.com (8.8.1/8.8.1) id IAA24167; Fri, 6 Mar 1998 08:58:20 -0500 (EST)
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 1998 08:58:20 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <199803061358.IAA24167@rstcorp.com>
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?
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.3.96.980305140234.27626A-100000@echonyc.com>
References: <Pine.GSO.3.96.980305140234.27626A-100000@echonyc.com>
X-Mailer: VM 6.40 under 19.16 "Lille" XEmacs Lucid
Reply-To: "Viren R. Shah"  <viren@rstcorp.com>
X-Face: )~y+U*K:yzjz{q<5lzpI_SVef'U.])9g[C9`1N@]u3,MHY7f*l7C)[_NjM4y4K8$uIUh|\u
 (K&&HS6,M!61&GMTk'mqmB/Qg]]X}"?TzsFl]"2v!bl8']dma.:^IY^a[lbOI>U:b<~FyK3q-p{HmZ
 mn~g.`~BE!5{2D:}Yi+\_KkWe?XaHj9$ko1k8iKLYv5*_2c8"G=?Up[}hn+7RNM(bzBZ_wWk6!Pf&B
 ?3Tcm7M7B~W%K/I0aX3]*=jP?aM]H6HBPT`oLk+0n^_;N\2\%|Rhy;p}34Q.jEsM\qtnxcm;ag%Nq
Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.106)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk

>>>>> "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