Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 15:41:19 -0500 From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org> To: John Polstra <jdp@polstra.com> Cc: net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Tuning UDP for NFS Message-ID: <20010831154119.S81307@elvis.mu.org> In-Reply-To: <200108312003.f7VK3k004259@vashon.polstra.com>; from jdp@polstra.com on Fri, Aug 31, 2001 at 01:03:46PM -0700 References: <20010831130902.A15501@nomad.lets.net> <20010831125120.O81307@elvis.mu.org> <200108312003.f7VK3k004259@vashon.polstra.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* John Polstra <jdp@polstra.com> [010831 15:03] wrote: > In article <20010831125120.O81307@elvis.mu.org>, > Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org> wrote: > > > > Using UDP is usually a bad idea, I would use tcp, I find that these > > flags make for a decent mount point that's quite fast: > > rw,tcp,intr,nfsv3,-w=32768,-r=32768 > > FreeBSD's "src/etc/amd.map" file still has "vers=2,proto=udp". Do > you think we should change it? I'm not familiar with amd, what implications would that have? What worries me is people using amd against a v2 server, also those tunables are good at tickling bugs in other NFS implementations (as well as ours, at least a year or two ago). So if amd is smart enough to downgrade then yes, otherwise perhaps just a comment to indicate that the person may want to use better mount options... ? -- -Alfred Perlstein [alfred@freebsd.org] 'Instead of asking why a piece of software is using "1970s technology," start asking why software is ignoring 30 years of accumulated wisdom.' To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010831154119.S81307>