Yes Jeffrey, you have railed against the netapp multiple times now.
Send me some flawless hardware, I'd appreciate it :)
The problems you describe effect all session management schemes that must
span multiple systems ( database is down, can't read sessions, requests
stack up etc ) and are not really particular to the NFS issue from my
perspective. It would be much easier to write app logic to recover from a
different scheme but the problem is mostly the same with different
recovery times.
John-
On Tue, 9 May 2000, Jeffrey W. Baker wrote:
> On Tue, 9 May 2000, John Armstrong wrote:
>
> > Lots of folks are saying the running File based sessions over NFS is
> > problematic. We are doing it without any noticeable issues so far but
> > I am _very_ curious as to what we need to watch out for. I'd like to
> > meet the evil before I have to do battle with it if you get my drift.
> >
> > If anyone has any insight with some fairly specific examples that
> > would be awesome. We're running our sessions off of a Network
> > Appliance Filer and so far performance is fantastic as is data
> > integrity..
>
> Hahahahaha sigh.
>
> Seriously though, you can search this lists' archive for NetApp to get my
> read on that particular piece of hardware. The bottom line is that it is
> a very nice machine, but not the flawless miracle that their literature
> says it is.
>
> The problem with NFS is that it takes so long to detect problems. If your
> platform's NFS timeout is, say, 60 seconds, how many requests are going to
> stack up while you wait for that timeout to elapse? Once you know there
> is a problem, does your code deal with it properly? What are you going to
> do with all those requests that stacked up? How do you tell your
> application that NFS is available again?
>
> We now return you to "All sessions, all the time."
>
> -jwb
>
>
