Patrick O'Callaghan wrote, On 01/07/2009 10:16 AM:
That would depend on which is worse, potentially losing data or having
a client machine hang because the server is (perhaps temporarily)
unavailable. It depends totally on the specific application scenario.
To quote nfs(5):
<quote>
A so-called "soft" timeout can cause silent data corruption in
certain cases. As such, use the soft option only when client
responsiveness is more important than data integrity. Using NFS over
TCP or increasing the value of the retrans option may mitigate some
of the risks of using the soft option.
</quote>
IOW there is no "right" answer to this.
poc
I agree that there is no `"right" answer to this`, but from experience I have
found that the best answer to using NFS without data loss and without
_permanent_ application lockup is to use:
hard,intr
'soft' on the other hand has lost me much data and caused many a bottle of
administrator headache remedy to be used. Now a LART is called for anytime I
find someone on my network using soft... even if they have not yet told me
they are having problems with NFS data loss.
--
Todd Denniston
Crane Division, Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC Crane)
Harnessing the Power of Technology for the Warfighter
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
