Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 18 Sep 1999 14:44:32 +0200 (CEST) | From | David Weinehall <> | Subject | Re: NFS corruption revisited |
| |
On Sat, 18 Sep 1999, Werner Almesberger wrote:
> David Weinehall wrote: > > I don't think it's auto-detectable (I doubt that the servers will tell you > > in the negotiation "hey mister, I'm a buggy server" > > Couldn't mount, if mounting rw, mount the FS with padding enabled, write > a padded file, read it back, and - if necessary - remount without padding ? > Ugly, I know, but at least the unsuspecting admin wouldn't mount in > waiting-for-massive-data-loss mode.
Hmmm. Wouldn't it be better to make padding the mount-time option, and have the more fault-safe (albeit a tad bit slower) behaviour default? This way, no unpleasant surprises.
> I think we have the same problem with our NFS server (some ancient Solaris), > and, at least in our case, it strikes infrequently enough that it's hard to > guess what may be wrong. (So far, I've been suspecting kernel memory > handling, binutils, Ethernet card & driver, TCP/IP stack, RAM, power > supply, ...)
I suggest you get the approriate patch from SunSolve and see if that helps.
/David _ _ // David Weinehall <tao@acc.umu.se> /> Northern lights wander \\ // Project MCA Linux hacker // Dance across the winter sky // \> http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/ </ Full colour fire </
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |