From: Olaf Kirch Subject: Re: Delays on "first" access to a NFS mount Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2007 14:27:08 +0100 Message-ID: <200703081427.09871.olaf.kirch@oracle.com> References: <20070307112347.6a40faff.simon.peter@gmx.de> <20070307215406.GR26553@fieldses.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: nfs@lists.sourceforge.net Return-path: Received: from sc8-sf-mx2-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.92] helo=mail.sourceforge.net) by sc8-sf-list2-new.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HPIed-0001SM-2M for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 08 Mar 2007 05:27:35 -0800 Received: from rgminet01.oracle.com ([148.87.113.118]) by mail.sourceforge.net with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.44) id 1HPIee-0004hr-LI for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 08 Mar 2007 05:27:37 -0800 Received: from rgmgw2.us.oracle.com (rgmgw2.us.oracle.com [138.1.186.111]) by rgminet01.oracle.com (Switch-3.2.4/Switch-3.1.6) with ESMTP id l28DRSem031257 for ; Thu, 8 Mar 2007 06:27:28 -0700 Received: from rcsmt251.oracle.com (rcsmt251.oracle.com [148.87.90.196]) by rgmgw2.us.oracle.com (Switch-3.2.4/Switch-3.1.7) with ESMTP id l28AXdg3002242 for ; Thu, 8 Mar 2007 06:27:27 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20070307215406.GR26553@fieldses.org> List-Id: "Discussion of NFS under Linux development, interoperability, and testing." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: nfs-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: nfs-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net On Wednesday 07 March 2007 22:54, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > - Maintaining a static in-kernel exports table instead of > loading it on demand from mountd, and Well, the original implementation did just that, and people kept forgetting to re-run exportfs after changing the exports table, and whatnot. Lots of gross inconsistencies. The addition of a dynamic exports table was considered a sliced bread kind of innovation... so it does feel like time warp when we talk about a static export table now. > - divorcing the exports namespace completely from any local > process namespace, to the extent that you could even just say > "I want to export /dev/sda7 as /usr/local/bin" without first > mounting /dev/sda7 someplace. Is that really a desirable goal? From an admin's point of view, file names are usually more "natural" than using fs uuids or retro stuff such as device file names (the udev people would actually hit you with their "device numbers are smoke and mirrors" bat now). Users actually want things like "I export /mnt and then clients can see the contents of the CD mounted on /mnt/cdrom" Olaf -- Olaf Kirch | --- o --- Nous sommes du soleil we love when we play okir@lst.de | / | \ sol.dhoop.naytheet.ah kin.ir.samse.qurax ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ NFS maillist - NFS@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs