On Sun, 2008-07-20 at 20:41 -0700, Chris Walker wrote: > From jimc [07/20 15:31]: > > Actually, only the sysop knows which is more important: doing the mount > > storm to respond to stat() or statfs(), or avoiding the storm. > > Agreed. In our case, we have 'heavily discouraged' use of /net on our > big servers and we would prefer that statfs()/stat() waited for the > automount to complete.
Just to be absolutely clear. The "browse" or "--ghost option isn't being used, in oder to avoid mount storms, but we still see stat(2) and statfs(2) (et. al.) not wait for a mount to complete. Is that right? Is anyone in a position to test a kernel patch? Ian _______________________________________________ autofs mailing list autofs@linux.kernel.org http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/autofs
