Peter Staubach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Jeff Moyer wrote:
>> Ian Kent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>
>>> On Mon, 2007-07-30 at 15:36 +0200, Lukas Kolbe wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Ian, thanks for your support!
>>>>
>>>>>> Presumably the exports are distinct, in which case using a list of
>>>>>> server should allow autofs to try each one?
>>>>>>
>>>> Yep, they are - differnet homes come from different servers.
>>>>>> What about trying something like:
>>>>>>
>>>>> On second thoughts this may get only the nfs4 or only the nfs3 servers
>>>>> as well.
>>>>>
>>>> Automount now mounts fine from all servers, but still nfs3
>>>> only. /proc/mounts shows me:
>>>>
>>>> figaro:/users/xxx /homes/xxx nfs
>>>> rw,nosuid,vers=3,rsize=32768,wsize=32768,hard,intr,proto=tcp,timeo=600,retrans=2,sec=sys,addr=figaro
>>>> 0 0
>>>> bongossi:/export/yyy /homes/yyy nfs
>>>> rw,nosuid,vers=3,rsize=1048576,wsize=1048576,hard,intr,proto=tcp,timeo=600,retrans=2,sec=sys,addr=bongossi
>>>> 0 0
>>>>
>>>> where figaro only exports nfs v3, bongossi exports both v4 and v3 and we
>>>> really would like to use v4.
>>>>
>>> Actually, a multi map entry in the master map would probably work.
>>> Initially I missed this out of version 5 (by accident) so you'll need
>>> the patch on kernel.org that adds it. In fact I'd recommend applying all
>>> the 5.0.2 patches.
>>>
>>> So forget the last suggestion and patch and apply all the 5.0.2 patches
>>> on kernel.org and try a line in the master map like:
>>>
>>> /homes multi yp auto_homes
>>> -fstype=nfs4,nosuid,grpid,nobrowse,proto=tcp,port=2049 -- \
>>> yp auto_homes
>>> -fstype=nfs,nosuid,grpid,nobrowse,proto=tcp,port=2049
>>>
>>> and see if that gets what you need. The nfs4 one needs to be first
>>> because the v4 servers provide both v4 and v3.
>>>
>>
>> That won't work as the cache code will not even add the second set of
>> entries for the keys:
>>
>> cache_update:
>> } else {
>> /* Already seen one of these */
>> if (me->age == age)
>> return CHE_OK;
>
> All these excellent suggestions and analysis notwithstanding,
> wouldn't it be easier to build a version of the NFS mount
> command which defaulted to NFSv4?
Precisely. I wasn't sure if that was an option, though. We were slow
to move to nfsv3 as the default, as I recall.
-Jeff
_______________________________________________
autofs mailing list
[email protected]
http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/autofs
