The autofs man pages on Redhat Enterprise Linux 3 as well as Fedora Core
3 both say that autofs supports replicated, readonly fileserver failover
- but then there's a footnote of sorts that says autofs only supports it
to the extent that mount does.
Upon trying to do such a mount, I get:
seki-root> mount
dcslib1.nacs.uci.edu,dcslib4.nacs.uci.edu:/dcspdb/rhel-3-i686 /mnt/nfs
mount: warning: multiple hostnames not supported
Thu Jan 27 16:12:18
seki-root>
Is there a version of mount available, or in early development, that
supports this feature?
Thanks!
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IntelliVIEW -- Interactive Reporting
Tool for open source databases. Create drag-&-drop reports. Save time
by over 75%! Publish reports on the web. Export to DOC, XLS, RTF, etc.
Download a FREE copy at http://www.intelliview.com/go/osdn_nl
_______________________________________________
NFS maillist - [email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005, Dan Stromberg wrote:
>
> The autofs man pages on Redhat Enterprise Linux 3 as well as Fedora Core
> 3 both say that autofs supports replicated, readonly fileserver failover
> - but then there's a footnote of sorts that says autofs only supports it
> to the extent that mount does.
That part of the man page is old and slightly out of date.
The reason that this is left there is that autofs cannot support
dynamic failover as it just uses mount. However, a different host may be
selected at mount, after a previous timeout, for example. The issue of
umounting existing mounts from servers that have gone away is not
explicitly dealt with yet.
>
> Upon trying to do such a mount, I get:
>
> seki-root> mount
> dcslib1.nacs.uci.edu,dcslib4.nacs.uci.edu:/dcspdb/rhel-3-i686 /mnt/nfs
> mount: warning: multiple hostnames not supported
> Thu Jan 27 16:12:18
What version of autofs are you using?
The autofs replicated server code is still relatively new.
If your autofs supports replicated server map entries then multiple
host mount requests will not reach the mount command.
If you are using a RedHat based distro then check
http://people.redhat.com/jmoyer
for the latest patched versions
Also, you may need a kernel patch depending on your kernel version. See
README.patches in the distribution or join the autofs list at
http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/autofs
>
> seki-root>
>
>
> Is there a version of mount available, or in early development, that
> supports this feature?
Don't know. Anyone?
Ian
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IntelliVIEW -- Interactive Reporting
Tool for open source databases. Create drag-&-drop reports. Save time
by over 75%! Publish reports on the web. Export to DOC, XLS, RTF, etc.
Download a FREE copy at http://www.intelliview.com/go/osdn_nl
_______________________________________________
NFS maillist - [email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs
On Sat, 2005-01-29 at 11:46 +0800, [email protected] wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Jan 2005, Dan Stromberg wrote:
>
> >
> > The autofs man pages on Redhat Enterprise Linux 3 as well as Fedora Core
> > 3 both say that autofs supports replicated, readonly fileserver failover
> > - but then there's a footnote of sorts that says autofs only supports it
> > to the extent that mount does.
>
> That part of the man page is old and slightly out of date.
>
> The reason that this is left there is that autofs cannot support
> dynamic failover as it just uses mount. However, a different host may be
> selected at mount, after a previous timeout, for example. The issue of
> umounting existing mounts from servers that have gone away is not
> explicitly dealt with yet.
I see.
> >
> > Upon trying to do such a mount, I get:
> >
> > seki-root> mount
> > dcslib1.nacs.uci.edu,dcslib4.nacs.uci.edu:/dcspdb/rhel-3-i686 /mnt/nfs
> > mount: warning: multiple hostnames not supported
> > Thu Jan 27 16:12:18
> What version of autofs are you using?
> The autofs replicated server code is still relatively new.
FC3: autofs-4.1.3-28
RHEL3: autofs-4.1.3-47
The FC3 is yum update'd fairly regulary, and the RHEL3 is up2date'd
regularly as well.
> If your autofs supports replicated server map entries then multiple
> host mount requests will not reach the mount command.
Interesting.
> If you are using a RedHat based distro then check
> http://people.redhat.com/jmoyer
> for the latest patched versions
>
> Also, you may need a kernel patch depending on your kernel version. See
> README.patches in the distribution or join the autofs list at
> http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/autofs
I'm certain my management will only go for this, in the short term, if
it works on a mainstream RHEL3 system. Unfortunately, for me, the rest
is academic interest.
> >
> > seki-root>
> >
> >
> > Is there a version of mount available, or in early development, that
> > supports this feature?
>
> Don't know. Anyone?
>
> Ian
Thanks for the info!
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IntelliVIEW -- Interactive Reporting
Tool for open source databases. Create drag-&-drop reports. Save time
by over 75%! Publish reports on the web. Export to DOC, XLS, RTF, etc.
Download a FREE copy at http://www.intelliview.com/go/osdn_nl
_______________________________________________
NFS maillist - [email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs
On Tue, 2005-02-01 at 15:08 -0500, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> ==> Regarding Re: [NFS] NFS readonly failover and linux?; Ian Kent <[email protected]> adds:
>
> raven> On Mon, 31 Jan 2005, Dan Stromberg wrote:
> >> On Sat, 2005-01-29 at 11:46 +0800, [email protected] wrote: > On Thu, 27
> >> Jan 2005, Dan Stromberg wrote:
> >> >
> >> > >
> >> > > The autofs man pages on Redhat Enterprise Linux 3 as well as Fedora
> >> Core > > 3 both say that autofs supports replicated, readonly fileserver
> >> failover > > - but then there's a footnote of sorts that says autofs
> >> only supports it > > to the extent that mount does.
> >> >
> >> > That part of the man page is old and slightly out of date.
> >> >
> >> > The reason that this is left there is that autofs cannot support >
> >> dynamic failover as it just uses mount. However, a different host may be
> >> > selected at mount, after a previous timeout, for example. The issue of
> >> > umounting existing mounts from servers that have gone away is not >
> >> explicitly dealt with yet.
> >>
> >> I see.
> >>
> >> > >
> >> > > Upon trying to do such a mount, I get:
> >> > >
> >> > > seki-root> mount > >
> >> dcslib1.nacs.uci.edu,dcslib4.nacs.uci.edu:/dcspdb/rhel-3-i686 /mnt/nfs >
> >> > mount: warning: multiple hostnames not supported > > Thu Jan 27
> >> 16:12:18
> >>
> >> > What version of autofs are you using? > The autofs replicated server
> >> code is still relatively new.
>
> raven> But, as we know, mount doesn't know about multiple host
> raven> names. autofs breaks these out.
>
> So what is the actual problem, here? Are you using the automounter? What
> do your config files look like?
>
> >> FC3: autofs-4.1.3-28 RHEL3: autofs-4.1.3-47
>
> raven> I believe that the replicated server code should be present in both
> raven> of these.
>
> raven> Can you confirm please Jeff?
>
> raven> Perhaps you are seeing a bug which needs to be addressed.
>
> Yes, the replicated server code is present in both of these versions.
>
> >> The FC3 is yum update'd fairly regulary, and the RHEL3 is up2date'd
> >> regularly as well.
> >>
> >> > If your autofs supports replicated server map entries then multiple >
> >> host mount requests will not reach the mount command.
> >>
> >> Interesting.
> >>
> >> > If you are using a RedHat based distro then check >
> >> http://people.redhat.com/jmoyer > for the latest patched versions
> >> >
> >> > Also, you may need a kernel patch depending on your kernel
> >> version. See > README.patches in the distribution or join the autofs
> >> list at > http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/autofs
> >>
> >> I'm certain my management will only go for this, in the short term, if
> >> it works on a mainstream RHEL3 system. Unfortunately, for me, the rest
> >> is academic interest.
>
> raven> Once again I believe that the kernels mentioned here are up to date
> raven> wrt autofs.
>
> raven> Certainly, the latest FC3 kernel is at 2.6.10 which has all the
> raven> autofs4 updates included in the base kernel.
>
> raven> I believe the latest update to RHEL3 is also up to date. Jeff?
>
> Yes, both kernels have the necessary patches to support replicated server.
>
> raven> So perhaps you could send a log trace with the "--debug" option
> raven> added to the master map entry.
>
> And please include the contents of your maps!
>
> -Jeff
Here are the maps we use on Solaris 9. Should they work the same way on
RHEL 3?
autoinst-strombrg> cat /etc/auto_dcslib
/dcs -ro
dcslib1.nacs.uci.edu,dcslib2.nacs.uci.edu,dcslib3.nacs.uci.edu:/dcspdb/sun4-5
/dcslib -ro
dcslib1.nacs.uci.edu,dcslib2.nacs.uci.edu,dcslib3.nacs.uci.edu:/dcspda
autoinst-strombrg> cat /etc/auto_master
# Master map for automounter
#
+auto.master
/net -hosts -nosuid,nobrowse
#/home auto_home -nobrowse
/xfn -xfn
/- auto_direct
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005, Dan Stromberg wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-02-01 at 15:08 -0500, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> > ==> Regarding Re: [NFS] NFS readonly failover and linux?; Ian Kent <[email protected]> adds:
> >
> > raven> On Mon, 31 Jan 2005, Dan Stromberg wrote:
> > >> On Sat, 2005-01-29 at 11:46 +0800, [email protected] wrote: > On Thu, 27
> > >> Jan 2005, Dan Stromberg wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > The autofs man pages on Redhat Enterprise Linux 3 as well as Fedora
> > >> Core > > 3 both say that autofs supports replicated, readonly fileserver
> > >> failover > > - but then there's a footnote of sorts that says autofs
> > >> only supports it > > to the extent that mount does.
> > >> >
> > >> > That part of the man page is old and slightly out of date.
> > >> >
> > >> > The reason that this is left there is that autofs cannot support >
> > >> dynamic failover as it just uses mount. However, a different host may be
> > >> > selected at mount, after a previous timeout, for example. The issue of
> > >> > umounting existing mounts from servers that have gone away is not >
> > >> explicitly dealt with yet.
> > >>
> > >> I see.
> > >>
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Upon trying to do such a mount, I get:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > seki-root> mount > >
> > >> dcslib1.nacs.uci.edu,dcslib4.nacs.uci.edu:/dcspdb/rhel-3-i686 /mnt/nfs >
> > >> > mount: warning: multiple hostnames not supported > > Thu Jan 27
> > >> 16:12:18
> > >>
> > >> > What version of autofs are you using? > The autofs replicated server
> > >> code is still relatively new.
> >
> > raven> But, as we know, mount doesn't know about multiple host
> > raven> names. autofs breaks these out.
> >
> > So what is the actual problem, here? Are you using the automounter? What
> > do your config files look like?
> >
> > >> FC3: autofs-4.1.3-28 RHEL3: autofs-4.1.3-47
> >
> > raven> I believe that the replicated server code should be present in both
> > raven> of these.
> >
> > raven> Can you confirm please Jeff?
> >
> > raven> Perhaps you are seeing a bug which needs to be addressed.
> >
> > Yes, the replicated server code is present in both of these versions.
> >
> > >> The FC3 is yum update'd fairly regulary, and the RHEL3 is up2date'd
> > >> regularly as well.
> > >>
> > >> > If your autofs supports replicated server map entries then multiple >
> > >> host mount requests will not reach the mount command.
> > >>
> > >> Interesting.
> > >>
> > >> > If you are using a RedHat based distro then check >
> > >> http://people.redhat.com/jmoyer > for the latest patched versions
> > >> >
> > >> > Also, you may need a kernel patch depending on your kernel
> > >> version. See > README.patches in the distribution or join the autofs
> > >> list at > http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/autofs
> > >>
> > >> I'm certain my management will only go for this, in the short term, if
> > >> it works on a mainstream RHEL3 system. Unfortunately, for me, the rest
> > >> is academic interest.
> >
> > raven> Once again I believe that the kernels mentioned here are up to date
> > raven> wrt autofs.
> >
> > raven> Certainly, the latest FC3 kernel is at 2.6.10 which has all the
> > raven> autofs4 updates included in the base kernel.
> >
> > raven> I believe the latest update to RHEL3 is also up to date. Jeff?
> >
> > Yes, both kernels have the necessary patches to support replicated server.
> >
> > raven> So perhaps you could send a log trace with the "--debug" option
> > raven> added to the master map entry.
> >
> > And please include the contents of your maps!
> >
> > -Jeff
>
Short answer is no.
> Here are the maps we use on Solaris 9. Should they work the same way on
> RHEL 3?
>
> autoinst-strombrg> cat /etc/auto_dcslib
> /dcs -ro
^^^^
Single level direct mount entries don't yet work.
> dcslib1.nacs.uci.edu,dcslib2.nacs.uci.edu,dcslib3.nacs.uci.edu:/dcspdb/sun4-5
> /dcslib -ro
> dcslib1.nacs.uci.edu,dcslib2.nacs.uci.edu,dcslib3.nacs.uci.edu:/dcspda
>
> autoinst-strombrg> cat /etc/auto_master
> # Master map for automounter
> #
> +auto.master
> /net -hosts -nosuid,nobrowse
> #/home auto_home -nobrowse
> /xfn -xfn
> /- auto_direct
^^^^^^^^^^^ Don't you mean auto_dcslib?
>
>
>
-------------------------------------------------------
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click
_______________________________________________
NFS maillist - [email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs
On Fri, 2005-02-18 at 12:09 +0800, Ian Kent wrote:
> > > And please include the contents of your maps!
> > >
> > > -Jeff
> >
>
> Short answer is no.
>
> > Here are the maps we use on Solaris 9. Should they work the same way on
> > RHEL 3?
> >
> > autoinst-strombrg> cat /etc/auto_dcslib
> > /dcs -ro
> ^^^^
> Single level direct mount entries don't yet work.
What if we set up indirect mounts for /foo/dcs and /foo/dcslib, and then
had symlinks from /dcs and /dcslib?
> > dcslib1.nacs.uci.edu,dcslib2.nacs.uci.edu,dcslib3.nacs.uci.edu:/dcspdb/sun4-5
> > /dcslib -ro
> > dcslib1.nacs.uci.edu,dcslib2.nacs.uci.edu,dcslib3.nacs.uci.edu:/dcspda
> >
> > autoinst-strombrg> cat /etc/auto_master
> > # Master map for automounter
> > #
> > +auto.master
> > /net -hosts -nosuid,nobrowse
> > #/home auto_home -nobrowse
> > /xfn -xfn
> > /- auto_direct
> ^^^^^^^^^^^ Don't you mean auto_dcslib?
Apologies. I got these maps from a system on which they were only
vestigial. Here are the maps from a system that's actually doing
this :) :
data-strombrg> cat /etc/auto_dcslib
/dcs -ro
dcslib1.nacs.uci.edu,dcslib2.nacs.uci.edu,dcslib3.nacs.uci.edu:/dcspdb/sun4-5
/dcslib -ro
dcslib1.nacs.uci.edu,dcslib2.nacs.uci.edu,dcslib3.nacs.uci.edu:/dcspda
data-strombrg> cat /etc/auto_master
# Master map for automounter
#
+auto.master
/net -hosts -nosuid,nobrowse
#/home auto_home -nobrowse
#/xfn -xfn
/- auto_dcslib
/- auto_dcs
> >
> >
>
On Fri, 18 Feb 2005, Dan Stromberg wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-02-18 at 12:09 +0800, Ian Kent wrote:
>
>>>> And please include the contents of your maps!
>>>>
>>>> -Jeff
>>>
>>
>> Short answer is no.
>>
>>> Here are the maps we use on Solaris 9. Should they work the same way on
>>> RHEL 3?
>>>
>>> autoinst-strombrg> cat /etc/auto_dcslib
>>> /dcs -ro
>> ^^^^
>> Single level direct mount entries don't yet work.
>
> What if we set up indirect mounts for /foo/dcs and /foo/dcslib, and then
> had symlinks from /dcs and /dcslib?
That should work fine.
>
>>> dcslib1.nacs.uci.edu,dcslib2.nacs.uci.edu,dcslib3.nacs.uci.edu:/dcspdb/sun4-5
>>> /dcslib -ro
>>> dcslib1.nacs.uci.edu,dcslib2.nacs.uci.edu,dcslib3.nacs.uci.edu:/dcspda
>>>
>>> autoinst-strombrg> cat /etc/auto_master
>>> # Master map for automounter
>>> #
>>> +auto.master
>>> /net -hosts -nosuid,nobrowse
>>> #/home auto_home -nobrowse
>>> /xfn -xfn
>>> /- auto_direct
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^ Don't you mean auto_dcslib?
>
> Apologies. I got these maps from a system on which they were only
> vestigial. Here are the maps from a system that's actually doing
> this :) :
>
> data-strombrg> cat /etc/auto_dcslib
> /dcs -ro
> dcslib1.nacs.uci.edu,dcslib2.nacs.uci.edu,dcslib3.nacs.uci.edu:/dcspdb/sun4-5
> /dcslib -ro
> dcslib1.nacs.uci.edu,dcslib2.nacs.uci.edu,dcslib3.nacs.uci.edu:/dcspda
>
> data-strombrg> cat /etc/auto_master
> # Master map for automounter
> #
> +auto.master
> /net -hosts -nosuid,nobrowse
> #/home auto_home -nobrowse
> #/xfn -xfn
> /- auto_dcslib
> /- auto_dcs
>
Your hosts map won't work. It will be ignored. You can use the auto.net
program map in the distribution to give similar functionality.
>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
-------------------------------------------------------
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click
_______________________________________________
NFS maillist - [email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs
==> Regarding Re: [NFS] NFS readonly failover and linux?; [email protected] adds:
raven> Your hosts map won't work. It will be ignored. You can use the
raven> auto.net program map in the distribution to give similar
raven> functionality.
Perhaps it's time we just translated that. I mean, it's not that
difficult, and would bring us that much closer to compatibility.
-Jeff
On Mon, 21 Feb 2005, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> ==> Regarding Re: [NFS] NFS readonly failover and linux?; [email protected] adds:
>
> raven> Your hosts map won't work. It will be ignored. You can use the
> raven> auto.net program map in the distribution to give similar
> raven> functionality.
>
> Perhaps it's time we just translated that. I mean, it's not that
> difficult, and would bring us that much closer to compatibility.
Perhaps but I'd like to do a proper hosts modulei, but in the meantime,
why not.
Ian
-------------------------------------------------------
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click
_______________________________________________
NFS maillist - [email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs
On Mon, 31 Jan 2005, Dan Stromberg wrote:
> On Sat, 2005-01-29 at 11:46 +0800, [email protected] wrote:
> > On Thu, 27 Jan 2005, Dan Stromberg wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > The autofs man pages on Redhat Enterprise Linux 3 as well as Fedora Core
> > > 3 both say that autofs supports replicated, readonly fileserver failover
> > > - but then there's a footnote of sorts that says autofs only supports it
> > > to the extent that mount does.
> >
> > That part of the man page is old and slightly out of date.
> >
> > The reason that this is left there is that autofs cannot support
> > dynamic failover as it just uses mount. However, a different host may be
> > selected at mount, after a previous timeout, for example. The issue of
> > umounting existing mounts from servers that have gone away is not
> > explicitly dealt with yet.
>
> I see.
>
> > >
> > > Upon trying to do such a mount, I get:
> > >
> > > seki-root> mount
> > > dcslib1.nacs.uci.edu,dcslib4.nacs.uci.edu:/dcspdb/rhel-3-i686 /mnt/nfs
> > > mount: warning: multiple hostnames not supported
> > > Thu Jan 27 16:12:18
>
> > What version of autofs are you using?
> > The autofs replicated server code is still relatively new.
But, as we know, mount doesn't know about multiple host names. autofs
breaks these out.
>
> FC3: autofs-4.1.3-28
> RHEL3: autofs-4.1.3-47
I believe that the replicated server code should be present in both of
these.
Can you confirm please Jeff?
Perhaps you are seeing a bug which needs to be addressed.
>
> The FC3 is yum update'd fairly regulary, and the RHEL3 is up2date'd
> regularly as well.
>
> > If your autofs supports replicated server map entries then multiple
> > host mount requests will not reach the mount command.
>
> Interesting.
>
> > If you are using a RedHat based distro then check
> > http://people.redhat.com/jmoyer
> > for the latest patched versions
> >
> > Also, you may need a kernel patch depending on your kernel version. See
> > README.patches in the distribution or join the autofs list at
> > http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/autofs
>
> I'm certain my management will only go for this, in the short term, if
> it works on a mainstream RHEL3 system. Unfortunately, for me, the rest
> is academic interest.
Once again I believe that the kernels mentioned here are up to date wrt
autofs.
Certainly, the latest FC3 kernel is at 2.6.10 which has all the autofs4
updates included in the base kernel.
I believe the latest update to RHEL3 is also up to date. Jeff?
So perhaps you could send a log trace with the "--debug" option added to
the master map entry.
Ian
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IntelliVIEW -- Interactive Reporting
Tool for open source databases. Create drag-&-drop reports. Save time
by over 75%! Publish reports on the web. Export to DOC, XLS, RTF, etc.
Download a FREE copy at http://www.intelliview.com/go/osdn_nl
_______________________________________________
NFS maillist - [email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs
==> Regarding Re: [NFS] NFS readonly failover and linux?; Ian Kent <[email protected]> adds:
raven> On Mon, 31 Jan 2005, Dan Stromberg wrote:
>> On Sat, 2005-01-29 at 11:46 +0800, [email protected] wrote: > On Thu, 27
>> Jan 2005, Dan Stromberg wrote:
>> >
>> > >
>> > > The autofs man pages on Redhat Enterprise Linux 3 as well as Fedora
>> Core > > 3 both say that autofs supports replicated, readonly fileserver
>> failover > > - but then there's a footnote of sorts that says autofs
>> only supports it > > to the extent that mount does.
>> >
>> > That part of the man page is old and slightly out of date.
>> >
>> > The reason that this is left there is that autofs cannot support >
>> dynamic failover as it just uses mount. However, a different host may be
>> > selected at mount, after a previous timeout, for example. The issue of
>> > umounting existing mounts from servers that have gone away is not >
>> explicitly dealt with yet.
>>
>> I see.
>>
>> > >
>> > > Upon trying to do such a mount, I get:
>> > >
>> > > seki-root> mount > >
>> dcslib1.nacs.uci.edu,dcslib4.nacs.uci.edu:/dcspdb/rhel-3-i686 /mnt/nfs >
>> > mount: warning: multiple hostnames not supported > > Thu Jan 27
>> 16:12:18
>>
>> > What version of autofs are you using? > The autofs replicated server
>> code is still relatively new.
raven> But, as we know, mount doesn't know about multiple host
raven> names. autofs breaks these out.
So what is the actual problem, here? Are you using the automounter? What
do your config files look like?
>> FC3: autofs-4.1.3-28 RHEL3: autofs-4.1.3-47
raven> I believe that the replicated server code should be present in both
raven> of these.
raven> Can you confirm please Jeff?
raven> Perhaps you are seeing a bug which needs to be addressed.
Yes, the replicated server code is present in both of these versions.
>> The FC3 is yum update'd fairly regulary, and the RHEL3 is up2date'd
>> regularly as well.
>>
>> > If your autofs supports replicated server map entries then multiple >
>> host mount requests will not reach the mount command.
>>
>> Interesting.
>>
>> > If you are using a RedHat based distro then check >
>> http://people.redhat.com/jmoyer > for the latest patched versions
>> >
>> > Also, you may need a kernel patch depending on your kernel
>> version. See > README.patches in the distribution or join the autofs
>> list at > http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/autofs
>>
>> I'm certain my management will only go for this, in the short term, if
>> it works on a mainstream RHEL3 system. Unfortunately, for me, the rest
>> is academic interest.
raven> Once again I believe that the kernels mentioned here are up to date
raven> wrt autofs.
raven> Certainly, the latest FC3 kernel is at 2.6.10 which has all the
raven> autofs4 updates included in the base kernel.
raven> I believe the latest update to RHEL3 is also up to date. Jeff?
Yes, both kernels have the necessary patches to support replicated server.
raven> So perhaps you could send a log trace with the "--debug" option
raven> added to the master map entry.
And please include the contents of your maps!
-Jeff
On Tue, 2005-02-01 at 15:08 -0500, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> So what is the actual problem, here? Are you using the automounter? What
> do your config files look like?
I guess the problems are:
1) I haven't looked into this very far
2) I was beginning to think I shouldn't continue looking into this
because of the red herring in the man page
3) I've been trying sun-style automount maps only (copied from a sun),
and I'm not really sure if linux' autofs is compatible with exactly the
same format
> raven> Can you confirm please Jeff?
>
> raven> Perhaps you are seeing a bug which needs to be addressed.
>
> Yes, the replicated server code is present in both of these versions.
Sweet.
>
> raven> Once again I believe that the kernels mentioned here are up to date
> raven> wrt autofs.
>
> raven> Certainly, the latest FC3 kernel is at 2.6.10 which has all the
> raven> autofs4 updates included in the base kernel.
>
> raven> I believe the latest update to RHEL3 is also up to date. Jeff?
>
> Yes, both kernels have the necessary patches to support replicated server.
>
> raven> So perhaps you could send a log trace with the "--debug" option
> raven> added to the master map entry.
>
> And please include the contents of your maps!
I've attached a shar archive of the two relevant files that we use on
Solaris.
>