From owner-freebsd-stable Thu Sep 30 7:14:50 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from point.osg.gov.bc.ca (point.osg.gov.bc.ca [142.32.102.44]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 606D01557D for ; Thu, 30 Sep 1999 07:14:34 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from cy@cschuber.net.gov.bc.ca) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by point.osg.gov.bc.ca (8.8.7/8.8.8) id HAA30855; Thu, 30 Sep 1999 07:14:34 -0700 Received: from cschuber.net.gov.bc.ca(142.31.240.113), claiming to be "cwsys.cwsent.com" via SMTP by point.osg.gov.bc.ca, id smtpda30851; Thu Sep 30 07:14:14 1999 Received: (from uucp@localhost) by cwsys.cwsent.com (8.9.3/8.9.1) id HAA94029; Thu, 30 Sep 1999 07:14:12 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199909301414.HAA94029@cwsys.cwsent.com> Received: from localhost.cwsent.com(127.0.0.1), claiming to be "cwsys" via SMTP by localhost.cwsent.com, id smtpdA94022; Thu Sep 30 07:13:24 1999 X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0.2 2/24/98 Reply-To: Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group From: Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group X-OS: FreeBSD 3.3-RELEASE X-Sender: cy To: Mike Tancsa Cc: stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: State of NFS in STABLE In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 29 Sep 1999 22:24:53 EDT." <4.1.19990929221225.07e02a50@granite.sentex.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Thu, 30 Sep 1999 07:13:23 -0700 Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In message <4.1.19990929221225.07e02a50@granite.sentex.ca>, Mike Tancsa writes: > > 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 ? I use NFS on my network at home and at work. I've forced the use of V2 mounts for about 2-3 years (since 2.2), prior to that I used the default that was shipped with 2.0.5 and 2.1. At work I share files between Solaris, Tru64-UNIX, Linux, and FreeBSD. The only issues I've had are, 1) FreeBSD NFS may be slower than Solaris or Tru64-UNIX NFS. I haven't measured it. This is just a "seat of the pants" impression. 2) When sharing files from my desktop FreeBSD system, which has ipfw enabled, to a Tru64-UNIX system at an earthquake resistant site which is 5 hops away, Tru64-UNIX MTU discovery, which is broken, tends to mangle NFS packets (and Legato packets too). Reducing the NFS buffer size to ~ 1400 fixes this. Regards, Phone: (250)387-8437 Cy Schubert Fax: (250)387-5766 Sun/DEC Team, UNIX Group Internet: Cy.Schubert@uumail.gov.bc.ca ITSD Cy.Schubert@gems8.gov.bc.ca Province of BC "e**(i*pi)+1=0" To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message