Return-Path: Received: from mx2.netapp.com ([216.240.18.37]:57316 "EHLO mx2.netapp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753296Ab0LMTEr convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Dec 2010 14:04:47 -0500 Subject: Re: Side effects of having NFSv4 mounted over udp Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Thomas Haynes In-Reply-To: <4D05CF50.1010305@cea.fr> Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2010 13:04:28 -0600 Cc: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org Message-Id: References: <4D05CF50.1010305@cea.fr> To: DENIEL Philippe Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 On Dec 13, 2010, at 1:46 AM, DENIEL Philippe wrote: > Hi, > > I know NFSv4 is definitely a connection oriented protocol, but noting prevent from using "mount -t nfs4 -o proto=udp <...>". Using TCP instead of UDP could be of great interest, especially in a HPC context where thousands of clients will operate at the same time. If a nfs mount point is made over udp, what would be the side effects ? I tried to run the connectathon on such a udp based mount point and I could find no errors. Is NFSv4/UDP a suitable solution ? Or does it make no sense to use udp ? You might find that some implementations have UDP disabled and it might then make it hard to triage what is going on. I believe both NetApp's OnTap and Oracle's Solaris have it turned off. > > Thanks in advance for your answer. > > Regards > > Philippe > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html