Linux-kernel mailing list archive 1999-32,: Re: Key features that should go into 2.4 ...

# Re: Key features that should go into 2.4 ...

Niklas Edmundsson (nikke@ing.umu.se)
Tue, 10 Aug 1999 22:28:33 +0200 (CEST)

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Steven N. Hirsch: "Re: Ten Myths Dispelt For Linux"
- Previous message: Pedro Manuel: "Re: Key features that should go into 2.4 ... (fwd)"

On Tue, 10 Aug 1999, Matthew Kirkwood wrote:

> On Tue, 10 Aug 1999, Niklas Edmundsson wrote:
>
> Please correct me if I'm reading this wrong, but
<snip of my own writing>
> first you complain about under-tested, ineffective Linux nfs,
<snip again>
> and then you suggest that a set of even less tested, experimental
> patches be applied to improve this situation.

I wasn't (intentionally) refering to the existing set of patches. What
I want is working nfs in the kernel, without having to apply various
patches from various places... First stop should be working nfs2,
which means merging the various patches and solutions out there. I'm
not an nfs-expert, but if I have understood matters correctly nfs2 is
a bad design and nfs3 is "nfs done right". So why not try to get it
right as soon as possible ? Atleast I would like to see experimental
nfs3-support in 2.4 ...

> Trond, HJ, G. Allen and others have put in a lot of work, for which
> we're very grateful. It _is_ a little confusing (and disappointing)
> that there are different versions of three different NFS client and
> server patches (and then there's the ac series, which may, or may not
> include or conflict with any of these), but blindly applying them,
> especially when Linus has expressed reservations at the design and/or
> implementation of some of them is not the magic bullet that you might
> like to think it is.

I don't underestimate the work done (if I did then I would probably be
more stupid then I am ;) but it seems to me that more work needs to be
done in this area. It's also funny that none of the companies
announcing Linux-support have claimed that they want to import nfs
interoperability ...

> It's by no means a final solution but the code in 2.2 (and 2.3) works
> quite well for many of us. It would be rather troublesome if it stopped
> working again. The well documented and easily found patches improve
> matters for many people, but (correct me if I'm mistaken) there is little
> evidence that they're are harmless as you suggest.

They are definately not harmless (yet), but the nfs3 client-support
works better for us than the existing nfs2-support in 2.2.11 (in terms
of file-corruption). That's what I know, since I'm on the "user-side"
in this matter...

With some hard work it should be possible to put nfs3 client-support
in a useable state. I'm not that sure about the server-nfs3 though,
since it was doing more than one stupid thing when we tried it ;)

> (And why people running silly old versions of IRIX think that NFSv3 will
> help I have _no_ idea :)

Well, Irix 6.5.4 may be silly but it's definately not old...

/Nikke

    --
    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
     Niklas Edmundsson, Admin @ {acc,hpc2n,ing}.umu.se    |   nikke@ing.umu.se
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Man, I get weirder things than you in my breakfast cereal!
    =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

- Next message: Steven N. Hirsch: "Re: Ten Myths Dispelt For Linux"
- Previous message: Pedro Manuel: "Re: Key features that should go into 2.4 ... (fwd)"