From: "Ogden, Aaron A." Subject: ~800 mountpoint limitation Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 10:51:04 -0500 Sender: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Message-ID: <6AB920CC10586340BE1674976E0A991D0C6B81@slexch2.sugarland.unocal.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Return-path: Received: from sc8-sf-mx1-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.11] helo=sc8-sf-mx1.sourceforge.net) by sc8-sf-list1.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Cipher TLSv1:DES-CBC3-SHA:168) (Exim 3.31-VA-mm2 #1 (Debian)) id 1A9RSa-0007E2-00 for ; Tue, 14 Oct 2003 08:51:44 -0700 Received: from unogate.unocal.com ([192.94.3.1]) by sc8-sf-mx1.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.22) id 1A9RSZ-0003gx-D6 for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 14 Oct 2003 08:51:43 -0700 Received: from ElCapitan.ad.unocal.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by unogate.unocal.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id h9EFp5uX011365 for ; Tue, 14 Oct 2003 08:51:05 -0700 (PDT) To: 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: Message: 1 Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 11:23:51 +0800 (WST) From: Ian Kent To: "Ogden, Aaron A." cc: Mike Waychison , autofs mailing list , Subject: Re: [NFS] RE: [autofs] multiple servers per automount > On Fri, 10 Oct 2003, Ogden, Aaron A. wrote: >=20 > > > > > > > So this would indicate that even if there is a device system that can > > > increase the number of unnamed devices that subsystems like NFS cannot > > > handle this many mounts. > > > > Maybe. I'm not 100% certain though. Currently I am holding steady at > > 710 active mounts, I am going to write a little script to mount more in > > small increments, ie. read a list of ~1000 mountpoints from /home, mount > > a few of them, check the filesystems, and repeat... this way I will know > > exactly where things break down. > > Interesting. >=20 > If you can edge it up then it's probably not an available port > restriction. >=20 > There may be more than one issue at work here. Hello all, This limitation has been confirmed to my satisfaction, I just had a test machine crack at 799 mountpoints, so it seems that Chuck's RPC theory may be correct. Mike Waychison and Eric Werme mentioned that Solaris and HPUX use a multiplexed scheme to reduce the number of ports required for NFS clients, perhaps that is the direction linux NFS/RPC should be heading. --aaron ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program. SourceForge.net hosts over 70,000 Open Source Projects. See the people who have HELPED US provide better services: Click here: http://sourceforge.net/supporters.php _______________________________________________ NFS maillist - NFS@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs