From owner-freebsd-stable  Wed Sep 29 19:25: 4 1999
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Received: from sand2.sentex.ca (sand2.sentex.ca [209.167.248.3])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06F4314D32
	for <stable@freebsd.org>; Wed, 29 Sep 1999 19:24:56 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from mike@sentex.net)
Received: from gravel (ospf-mdt.sentex.net [205.211.164.81])
	by sand2.sentex.ca (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id WAA21308
	for <stable@freebsd.org>; Wed, 29 Sep 1999 22:24:55 -0400 (EDT)
	(envelope-from mike@sentex.net)
Message-Id: <4.1.19990929221225.07e02a50@granite.sentex.ca>
X-Sender: mdtancsa@granite.sentex.ca
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.1 
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 1999 22:24:53 -0400
To: stable@freebsd.org
From: Mike Tancsa <mike@sentex.net>
Subject: State of NFS in STABLE
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG


I have an application where having NFS mounts is required.  Looking back
through the recent archives, there still seem to be issues with NFS.
However, what is unclear is if this is primarily due to particular types of
I/O... In otherwords, if the nfs mount is Read Only, will I avoid the
majority of problems ? Or if I use V2 ? Or V3 ?

Thanks,

	---Mike
**********************************************************************
Mike Tancsa, Network Admin        *  mike@sentex.net
Sentex Communications Corp,       *  http://www.sentex.net/mike
Cambridge, Ontario                *  01.519.651.3400
Canada                            *


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message