From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 08:36:27 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 08:36:17 -0400 Received: from mons.uio.no ([129.240.130.14]:27102 "EHLO mons.uio.no") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 7 Sep 2001 08:36:10 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <15256.48964.101213.439253@charged.uio.no> Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 14:36:20 +0200 To: ptb@it.uc3m.es Cc: Mike Black , linux-kernel Subject: Re: 2.4.8 NFS Problems In-Reply-To: <200109071206.OAA24577@nbd.it.uc3m.es> In-Reply-To: <200109071206.OAA24577@nbd.it.uc3m.es> X-Mailer: VM 6.89 under 21.1 (patch 14) "Cuyahoga Valley" XEmacs Lucid Reply-To: trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no From: Trond Myklebust User-Agent: SEMI/1.13.7 (Awazu) CLIME/1.13.6 (=?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCQ2YbKEI=?= =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCJU4+MRsoQg==?=) MULE XEmacs/21.1 (patch 14) (Cuyahoga Valley) (i386-redhat-linux) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >>>>> " " == Peter T Breuer writes: >> Soft mount timeouts are not only due to network problems, but >> can equally well be due to internal congestion. The rate at >> which the network can transmit requests is usually (unless you >> are using Gigabit) way below the rate at which your machine can >> generate them. > But soft mounts at least break nicely and automatically. And > since failures are inevitable, I prefer them. The problem is that they need careful tuning if they are to work at all. They assume a perfect setup. For instance most servers will drop UDP requests if they don't have a free thread to serve them. They assume that you will automatically retry. soft mounts do retry, but give up eventually. IOW even on an otherwise working setup you will, every once in a blue moon, get an EIO due to a soft timeout and you will lose data. Cheers, Trond