From: Trond Myklebust Subject: Re: question on the inner workings of NFS soft mount Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 18:42:40 -0400 Message-ID: <1185489760.6585.269.camel@localhost> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Cc: nfs@lists.sourceforge.net To: Wim Colgate Return-path: Received: from sc8-sf-mx1-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.91] helo=mail.sourceforge.net) by sc8-sf-list2-new.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IEC2d-00074i-9l for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 26 Jul 2007 15:42:43 -0700 Received: from pat.uio.no ([129.240.10.15] ident=[U2FsdGVkX1812LkWTC+7e5jktn+CL7G+wVArdsNWyOc=]) by mail.sourceforge.net with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.44) id 1IEC2f-0006PL-Nl for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 26 Jul 2007 15:42:47 -0700 In-Reply-To: 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 Thu, 2007-07-26 at 15:39 -0700, Wim Colgate wrote: > Sure thing, I'll try UDP. One thing I forgot to add is that if the cable > is unplugged, the times are nicely 300ms timeouts -- which must eschew > any TCP backoff if the host is unreachable. Yup. The error values returned by the networking layer are different, and so we don't worry so much about exponential backoff. Trond ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________ NFS maillist - NFS@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs