From: Jeff Layton Subject: Re: network storage solutions - mounts Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 13:37:00 -0400 Sender: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Message-ID: <3EC3D03C.7050907@lmco.com> References: Reply-To: jeffrey.b.layton@lmco.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Cc: Alvin Oga , nfs@lists.sourceforge.net Return-path: Received: from mailgw1a.lmco.com ([192.31.106.7]) by sc8-sf-list1.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 3.31-VA-mm2 #1 (Debian)) id 19GMmu-0001hY-00 for ; Thu, 15 May 2003 10:45:04 -0700 In-reply-to: To: beowulf@beowulf.org 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: Alvin Oga wrote: > On Wed, 14 May 2003, Glen Kaukola wrote: > > > Alvin Oga wrote: > > some kernel folks will tell you that using soft mount WILL cause > corrupt data ... and that hard mount is better... > This is correct. The NFS homepage will explain this pretty clearly and there's a link to a paper by Chuck Lever at Netapps that explains it as well: http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/3183.html I'm cc-ing the NFS mailing list perhaps they can comment on this. > i prefer soft mount ... as i want the other machines to keep going, > even if one of the other boxes died for some reason > > if using hardmounts, everybody sits and wait for the other server > to come back online... if and when it does, and if it comes up > at some other ip# or some other nfs ports, other pcs need to be > rebooted too > - i dont like waiting around or rebooting > > hard mount vs soft mount is another vi vs emacs warz > but at least there's more technical justifications for the reasons > ( i've not seen any corrupt data due to soft mounts > - > - have seens lots of people that cannot work due to hard mounts > - onto servers that died > - > I would hazard to say that you've been luckly. However, the potential is there for corrupt data. I would rather wait on the server to come back than take a chance on corrupting data. > trick is NO rebooting allowed, under any condition ... NOT allowed > - find another way to fix the problem > ( well, only the last person in the list/responsibility hits > ( the button > > > On the odd chance my boss does buy some duplicate > > storage, what would you recommend I use to manage it? > > software raid ... on 4 IDE ports ... one drive per cable > > for NFS .... i'd use soft mounts > I'll let other people from the NFS list comment here. However, I'd say this is risky and something I would do - especially if you value your data. Jeff > > and NOBODY gets to reboot/touch any server ... > -- Jeff Layton Senior Engineer - Aerodynamics and CFD Lockheed-Martin Aeronautical Company - Marietta "Is it possible to overclock a cattle prod?" - Irv Mullins ------------------------------------------------------- Enterprise Linux Forum Conference & Expo, June 4-6, 2003, Santa Clara The only event dedicated to issues related to Linux enterprise solutions www.enterpriselinuxforum.com _______________________________________________ NFS maillist - NFS@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs