Return-Path: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: from aserp1040.oracle.com ([141.146.126.69]:51291 "EHLO aserp1040.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753078AbaCFP0j convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Mar 2014 10:26:39 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\)) Subject: Re: Optimal NFS mount options to safely allow interrupts and timeouts on newer kernels From: Chuck Lever In-Reply-To: <20140306123438.GA21799@umich.edu> Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2014 10:26:30 -0500 Cc: Jim Rees , Neil Brown , Linux NFS Mailing List Message-Id: <04BE61B0-08B5-4E0C-88B6-6D93127BB64E@oracle.com> References: <1696396609.119284.1394040541217.JavaMail.zimbra@xes-inc.com> <260588931.122771.1394041524167.JavaMail.zimbra@xes-inc.com> <20140306145042.6db53f60@notabene.brown> <1853694865.210849.1394082223818.JavaMail.zimbra@xes-inc.com> <20140306123438.GA21799@umich.edu> To: Andrew Martin Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mar 6, 2014, at 7:34 AM, Jim Rees wrote: > Given this is apache, I think if I were doing this I'd use ro,soft,intr,tcp > and not try to write anything to nfs. I agree. A static web page workload should be read-mostly or read-only. The (small) corruption risk with ?ro,soft" is that an interrupted read would cause the client to cache incomplete data. Skip ?intr? though, it really is a no-op after 2.6.25. If your workload is really ONLY reading files that don?t change often, you might consider ?ro,soft,vers=3,nocto?. -- Chuck Lever chuck[dot]lever[at]oracle[dot]com