From: Andrew Ryan Subject: Re: NFS over TCP test results from bakerg3@yahoo Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 18:38:38 -0700 (PDT) Sender: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Return-path: Received: from b.smtp-out.sonic.net ([208.201.224.39]) by sc8-sf-list1.sourceforge.net with smtp (Exim 3.31-VA-mm2 #1 (Debian)) id 198Vh8-0001W3-00 for ; Wed, 23 Apr 2003 18:38:38 -0700 Received: from newbolt (bolt.sonic.net [208.201.242.18]) by sub.sonic.net (8.11.6p2/8.8.5) with ESMTP id h3O1ccW23354 for ; Wed, 23 Apr 2003 18:38:38 -0700 To: nfs@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Discussion of NFS under Linux development, interoperability, and testing. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: I agree with Charles and Trond's earlier comments, and would like to add that if you share your exact test cases and more details about your setup, there are at least a few of us who also use TCP mounts with linux clients and netapp filers who would be interested in replicating and testing, and ferreting out any bugs which may exist. To call TCP nfs client mounts "not production worthy" at this stage is irresponsible and not really true. We use them in production against Netapp filers and have had great success since 2.4.20+NFSALL. Obviously your mileage is varying but I just wanted to weigh in with our experience. If there are bugs, and that's a distinct possibility, we want to help find and fix them. Essentially flaming the people that are going to do the analysis and write the patches isn't the best way to get this done. cheers, andrew ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ NFS maillist - NFS@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs