Hi Trond, Bfields, All,
We are useing nfsv3 in 2.6.34.13 kernel for commucial use. For some reasons(such as security), has requirement to upgrade to nfsv4(still on 2.6.34.x kernel). We did two things:
1. I passed through the git log of kernel.org of nfs, found after 2010(2.6.34 is released on May 2010, and no update on 2.6.34.x for nfs/nfsd), just for sampling, nfsd/nfs4proc.c has 460 commits while nfs/nfs3proc.c has only 38 commits.
2. Just enable nfsv4 on 2.6.34.13, got problem(EIO) on just a simple open. Found it's because of one commit(https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=a2c0b9e291208f65221a0ad8a0c80a377707d480), simply remove this commit, now can simply use nfsv4 on 2.6.34.13.
So we are worried about the stability of nfsv4 on 2.6.34.x.
If any one has some idea or information about:
1. Whether nfsv4 (including nfs/nfs4/sunrpc) of 2.6.34.x is stable enough for commercial use or not.
2. If nfsv4 is not stable enough on 2.6.34.x, which version can we use , 3.10 ? or 3.12 ?
3. Is there any mature commercial application on nfsv4 on 2.6.34.x or before? Can tell some famous company or app name ?
Any answer is helpful and welcome.
Thanks a lot.
Best Regards!
Wuqixuan
On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 01:45:47AM +0000, Wuqixuan wrote:
> On Feb 15, 2014, at 1:12, [email protected] wrote:
>
> >> I don't know anything about the specific bug that you found.
> >>
> >> Based on https://lwn.net/Articles/585416/ 2.6.34 appears to be EOL'd as
> >> of 2.6.34.15, so it would be up to you to support it past that.
> >>
> >> http://www.kernel.org/ lists which stable kernel branches are still
> >> being updated. I'm not sure where you find out how long those branches
> >> are expected to be maintained.
> >>
> >> Someone who needs guaranteed support periods for "commercial use"
> >> usually gets a contract with someone like my employer. (And indeed the
> >> enterprise distros do support NFSv4 on kernels that branched off before
> >> 2.6.34).
> >>
>
> > I will not support kernels that are not listed as actively part of the ‘stable’ program; I simply don’t have the resources to do so.
>
> > If you don’t want to go with an actively supported distribution kernel, I’d recommend going with kernel 3.10 rather than 3.12, simply because it is part of the 'long term release’ kernels (see https://www.kernel.org/category/releases.html ) and so will continue to receive updates until September 2015. That said, the fact that the kernel is in stable support doesn’t mean that we will be testing it actively for new bugs; it just means that we will be able to fix known bugs that have been discovered in newer kernels.
>
> > If you need stronger guarantees than that, then I agree with Bruce that you should pick a distribution that offers long term software maintenance (which may require you to pay support fees).
>
> Thank Trond and Bruce to reply.
>
> Currently, we are doing our Linux distribution based on 2.6.34.x. So no
> distribution OS support for us. All issues need to be fixed by us.
> Because we are not familiar with nfs protocal and the implementation,
> and 2.6.34.x is EOL already. So only if nfsv4 is stable enough (not many major bugs),
> then we can choose nfsv4 on 2.6.34.x.
>
> So now, our main doubt is just to want to know the stability of nfsv4 on 2.6.34.x.
> Because we found some many patch/commits merged in 3.x, but not merge into 2.6.34.x.
> We want to know as per your experiences, are there many major bugs is not fixed in 2.6.34.x,
> just fixed on 3.x ?
Sorry, that's just a harder question to answer than you realize.
Neither of us are going to be comfortable answering that question
without a lot of active testing or direct experience supporting that
particular kernel. You either need to do that sort of work yourself or
find someone else who has.
--b.
On Feb 15, 2014, at 1:12, [email protected] wrote:
>> I don't know anything about the specific bug that you found.
>>
>> Based on https://lwn.net/Articles/585416/ 2.6.34 appears to be EOL'd as
>> of 2.6.34.15, so it would be up to you to support it past that.
>>
>> http://www.kernel.org/ lists which stable kernel branches are still
>> being updated. I'm not sure where you find out how long those branches
>> are expected to be maintained.
>>
>> Someone who needs guaranteed support periods for "commercial use"
>> usually gets a contract with someone like my employer. (And indeed the
>> enterprise distros do support NFSv4 on kernels that branched off before
>> 2.6.34).
>>
> I will not support kernels that are not listed as actively part of the ?stable? program; I simply don?t have the resources to do so.
> If you don?t want to go with an actively supported distribution kernel, I?d recommend going with kernel 3.10 rather than 3.12, simply because it is part of the 'long term release? kernels (see https://www.kernel.org/category/releases.html ) and so will continue to receive updates until September 2015. That said, the fact that the kernel is in stable support doesn?t mean that we will be testing it actively for new bugs; it just means that we will be able to fix known bugs that have been discovered in newer kernels.
> If you need stronger guarantees than that, then I agree with Bruce that you should pick a distribution that offers long term software maintenance (which may require you to pay support fees).
Thank Trond and Bruce to reply.
Currently, we are doing our Linux distribution based on 2.6.34.x. So no
distribution OS support for us. All issues need to be fixed by us.
Because we are not familiar with nfs protocal and the implementation,
and 2.6.34.x is EOL already. So only if nfsv4 is stable enough (not many major bugs),
then we can choose nfsv4 on 2.6.34.x.
So now, our main doubt is just to want to know the stability of nfsv4 on 2.6.34.x.
Because we found some many patch/commits merged in 3.x, but not merge into 2.6.34.x.
We want to know as per your experiences, are there many major bugs is not fixed in 2.6.34.x,
just fixed on 3.x ?
Best Regards & Thanks a lot
--Wuqixuan
On Feb 14, 2014, at 10:53, [email protected] wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 08:55:11AM +0000, Wuqixuan wrote:
>> Hi Trond, Bfields, All,
>>
>> We are useing nfsv3 in 2.6.34.13 kernel for commucial use. For some reasons(such as security), has requirement to upgrade to nfsv4(still on 2.6.34.x kernel). We did two things:
>>
>> 1. I passed through the git log of kernel.org of nfs, found after 2010(2.6.34 is released on May 2010, and no update on 2.6.34.x for nfs/nfsd), just for sampling, nfsd/nfs4proc.c has 460 commits while nfs/nfs3proc.c has only 38 commits.
>> 2. Just enable nfsv4 on 2.6.34.13, got problem(EIO) on just a simple open. Found it's because of one commit(https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=a2c0b9e291208f65221a0ad8a0c80a377707d480), simply remove this commit, now can simply use nfsv4 on 2.6.34.13.
>>
>> So we are worried about the stability of nfsv4 on 2.6.34.x.
>> If any one has some idea or information about:
>>
>> 1. Whether nfsv4 (including nfs/nfs4/sunrpc) of 2.6.34.x is stable enough for commercial use or not.
>> 2. If nfsv4 is not stable enough on 2.6.34.x, which version can we use , 3.10 ? or 3.12 ?
>> 3. Is there any mature commercial application on nfsv4 on 2.6.34.x or before? Can tell some famous company or app name ?
>
> I don't know anything about the specific bug that you found.
>
> Based on https://lwn.net/Articles/585416/ 2.6.34 appears to be EOL'd as
> of 2.6.34.15, so it would be up to you to support it past that.
>
> http://www.kernel.org/ lists which stable kernel branches are still
> being updated. I'm not sure where you find out how long those branches
> are expected to be maintained.
>
> Someone who needs guaranteed support periods for "commercial use"
> usually gets a contract with someone like my employer. (And indeed the
> enterprise distros do support NFSv4 on kernels that branched off before
> 2.6.34).
>
I will not support kernels that are not listed as actively part of the ?stable? program; I simply don?t have the resources to do so.
If you don?t want to go with an actively supported distribution kernel, I?d recommend going with kernel 3.10 rather than 3.12, simply because it is part of the 'long term release? kernels (see https://www.kernel.org/category/releases.html ) and so will continue to receive updates until September 2015. That said, the fact that the kernel is in stable support doesn?t mean that we will be testing it actively for new bugs; it just means that we will be able to fix known bugs that have been discovered in newer kernels.
If you need stronger guarantees than that, then I agree with Bruce that you should pick a distribution that offers long term software maintenance (which may require you to pay support fees).
_________________________________
Trond Myklebust
Linux NFS client maintainer, PrimaryData
[email protected]
On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 08:55:11AM +0000, Wuqixuan wrote:
> Hi Trond, Bfields, All,
>
> We are useing nfsv3 in 2.6.34.13 kernel for commucial use. For some reasons(such as security), has requirement to upgrade to nfsv4(still on 2.6.34.x kernel). We did two things:
>
> 1. I passed through the git log of kernel.org of nfs, found after 2010(2.6.34 is released on May 2010, and no update on 2.6.34.x for nfs/nfsd), just for sampling, nfsd/nfs4proc.c has 460 commits while nfs/nfs3proc.c has only 38 commits.
> 2. Just enable nfsv4 on 2.6.34.13, got problem(EIO) on just a simple open. Found it's because of one commit(https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=a2c0b9e291208f65221a0ad8a0c80a377707d480), simply remove this commit, now can simply use nfsv4 on 2.6.34.13.
>
> So we are worried about the stability of nfsv4 on 2.6.34.x.
> If any one has some idea or information about:
>
> 1. Whether nfsv4 (including nfs/nfs4/sunrpc) of 2.6.34.x is stable enough for commercial use or not.
> 2. If nfsv4 is not stable enough on 2.6.34.x, which version can we use , 3.10 ? or 3.12 ?
> 3. Is there any mature commercial application on nfsv4 on 2.6.34.x or before? Can tell some famous company or app name ?
I don't know anything about the specific bug that you found.
Based on https://lwn.net/Articles/585416/ 2.6.34 appears to be EOL'd as
of 2.6.34.15, so it would be up to you to support it past that.
http://www.kernel.org/ lists which stable kernel branches are still
being updated. I'm not sure where you find out how long those branches
are expected to be maintained.
Someone who needs guaranteed support periods for "commercial use"
usually gets a contract with someone like my employer. (And indeed the
enterprise distros do support NFSv4 on kernels that branched off before
2.6.34).
--b.