Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264208AbUDRXWh (ORCPT ); Sun, 18 Apr 2004 19:22:37 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264210AbUDRXWe (ORCPT ); Sun, 18 Apr 2004 19:22:34 -0400 Received: from mail.shareable.org ([81.29.64.88]:47523 "EHLO mail.shareable.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264208AbUDRXWc (ORCPT ); Sun, 18 Apr 2004 19:22:32 -0400 Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2004 00:22:30 +0100 From: Jamie Lokier To: Trond Myklebust Cc: Jamie Lokier , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: NFS and kernel 2.6.x Message-ID: <20040418232230.GA11064@mail.shareable.org> References: <1082079061.7141.85.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> <20040415185355.1674115b.akpm@osdl.org> <20040416090331.GC22226@mail.shareable.org> <1082130906.2581.10.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> <20040416184821.GA25402@mail.shareable.org> <1082142401.2581.131.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> <20040416193914.GA25792@mail.shareable.org> <1082241169.3930.14.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> <20040418032638.GA1786@mail.shareable.org> <1082271815.3619.104.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1082271815.3619.104.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1284 Lines: 31 Trond Myklebust wrote: > On Sat, 2004-04-17 at 20:26, Jamie Lokier wrote: > > Are they intended to stop doubling at 3.2? The major timeout > > thus happens after 22.3 seconds. > > > > Unsurprisingly, subsequent major timeouts take 44.1 seconds. > > Right... ...but since the timeout value is already capped at 60 seconds, > this is not a major problem. It is pretty pointless to be talking about > "predictable" or "consistent" behaviour when talking about a situation > where we believe that the server has crashed. I agree, but would still prefer more consistent behaviour if it is easy -- and I explained how to do it, it's an easy algorithm. You don't respond to the other question: the doubling stopping at 3.2s. Is it intended? It goes againt a basic principle of congestion control. > AFAICS, all we care about is to establish a predictable *lower limit*. I agree that is the most important thing, and the old behaviour was probably the cause of problems for at least one poster on this thread. -- Jamie - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/