From: Chuck Lever Subject: Re: stuck/hung nfsv4 mounts Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2008 16:40:44 -0500 Message-ID: <2C93A491-1277-42B6-9CED-FC06A85174D5@oracle.com> References: <1225724721.2247.29.camel@brian-laptop> <1225731544.6958.6.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org> <20081103172529.GA9008@citi.umich.edu> <1225733834.6958.12.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v929.2) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Cc: Jim Rees , "Brian J. Murrell" , linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org To: Trond Myklebust Return-path: Received: from rgminet01.oracle.com ([148.87.113.118]:19258 "EHLO rgminet01.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752381AbYKCVlF (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Nov 2008 16:41:05 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1225733834.6958.12.camel-rJ7iovZKK19ZJLDQqaL3InhyD016LWXt@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Nov 3, 2008, at Nov 3, 2008, 12:37 PM, Trond Myklebust wrote: > On Mon, 2008-11-03 at 12:25 -0500, Jim Rees wrote: >> Trond Myklebust wrote: >> >> BTW: NFSv4 + soft == BAD BAD BAD! >> >> Maybe this combination should be prohibited. Does it make any >> sense given >> the stateful nature of v4? > > It might make sense if we were to fix up the granularity of the > recovery > routines so that we are able to recover all the state associated with > just a single open owner or lock owner. Currently we'd have to recover > all the state associated with that server. > > IOW: we might be able to fix things up in the future, but right now, > NFSv4+soft is not a good idea. Two cents worth: Until NFSv4+soft works reasonably well, I wouldn't have any problem with making "soft" a no-op for nfs4 mounts. -- Chuck Lever chuck[dot]lever[at]oracle[dot]com