From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Dec 15 09:42:13 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEC4D16A492 for ; Fri, 15 Dec 2006 09:42:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from olli@lurza.secnetix.de) Received: from lurza.secnetix.de (lurza.secnetix.de [83.120.8.8]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE7E843DA9 for ; Fri, 15 Dec 2006 09:39:28 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from olli@lurza.secnetix.de) Received: from lurza.secnetix.de (klyvwf@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id kBF9ewxK081421; Fri, 15 Dec 2006 10:41:03 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from oliver.fromme@secnetix.de) Received: (from olli@localhost) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.13.4/8.13.1/Submit) id kBF9ev2E081420; Fri, 15 Dec 2006 10:40:57 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from olli) Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2006 10:40:57 +0100 (CET) Message-Id: <200612150940.kBF9ev2E081420@lurza.secnetix.de> From: Oliver Fromme To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG, kimimeister@gmail.com In-Reply-To: <42b497160612142059h331b2206p8ee2aaf13588458@mail.gmail.com> X-Newsgroups: list.freebsd-stable User-Agent: tin/1.8.2-20060425 ("Shillay") (UNIX) (FreeBSD/4.11-STABLE (i386)) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.1.2 (lurza.secnetix.de [127.0.0.1]); Fri, 15 Dec 2006 10:41:03 +0100 (CET) Cc: Subject: Re: Poor NFS performance after recent update X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG, kimimeister@gmail.com List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2006 09:42:13 -0000 Kimi Ostro wrote: > fserver:/data /media/data nfs rw,-b,-i,-s,-L,noauto A small side note (probably not related to your actual problem): It is usually a bad idea to use the -s ("soft") option, because many programs are not prepared to handle unexpected I/O errors, leading to file corruption. The following is an excerpt from the Solaris docs, which applies to FreeBSD as well: | File systems that are mounted read-write or that con- | tain executable files should always be mounted with | the hard option. Applications using soft mounted file | systems may incur unexpected I/O errors, file corrup- | tion, and unexpected program core dumps. The soft | option is not recommended. I think a similar paragraph should be added to FreeBSD's mount_nfs(8) manpage and to the Handbook. Best regards Oliver -- Oliver Fromme, secnetix GmbH & Co. KG, Marktplatz 29, 85567 Grafing Dienstleistungen mit Schwerpunkt FreeBSD: http://www.secnetix.de/bsd Any opinions expressed in this message may be personal to the author and may not necessarily reflect the opinions of secnetix in any way. "I have stopped reading Stephen King novels. Now I just read C code instead." -- Richard A. O'Keefe