From owner-freebsd-audit@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Mar 25 03:29:08 2005
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-audit@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-audit@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A39E816A4CE
	for <freebsd-audit@FreeBSD.org>; Fri, 25 Mar 2005 03:29:08 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from mailout2.pacific.net.au (mailout2.pacific.net.au [61.8.0.85])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCCBB43D5A
	for <freebsd-audit@FreeBSD.org>; Fri, 25 Mar 2005 03:29:07 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from bde@zeta.org.au)
Received: from mailproxy1.pacific.net.au (mailproxy1.pacific.net.au
	[61.8.0.86])j2P3T5Hn028582;	Fri, 25 Mar 2005 14:29:05 +1100
Received: from katana.zip.com.au (katana.zip.com.au [61.8.7.246])
	j2P3T2S5028423;	Fri, 25 Mar 2005 14:29:03 +1100
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 14:29:01 +1100 (EST)
From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
X-X-Sender: bde@delplex.bde.org
To: Xin LI <delphij@frontfree.net>
In-Reply-To: <20050324180845.GA26524@frontfree.net>
Message-ID: <20050325140634.N360@delplex.bde.org>
References: <20050324180845.GA26524@frontfree.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
cc: freebsd-audit@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nfsserver patch for review
X-BeenThere: freebsd-audit@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: FreeBSD Security Audit <freebsd-audit.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-audit>,
	<mailto:freebsd-audit-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-audit>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-audit@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-audit-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-audit>,
	<mailto:freebsd-audit-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 03:29:08 -0000

On Fri, 25 Mar 2005, Xin LI wrote:

> From NetBSD:
>
> For nfs3 requests, don't gather writes since it's clients' responsibility.
>
> Will anyone object if I will commit this against -CURRENT?

Not me.

Is it actually faster and/or more efficient (hopefully both)?

Write gathering may wrong even in the nfsv2 case, since the underlying
file system should do write clustering, and at least ffs does it, and
write clustering at the lowest level works well.

BTW, there is lots of vaguely related bogusness involving fsyncing writes:
- in the nfsv3 case, the server should just fsync what the client requests,
   but doesn't always.
- the async mount flag is bogus for nfs, and the vfs.nfs.async sysctl is
   even more bogus.  Interaction of these bogusnesses with not always
   honoring the client's fsync requests give many sub-bugs.

Bruce