Linda Walsh wrote: > Dave Howorth wrote: >> On Fri, 2007-12-07 at 15:34 +0100, Hans Witvliet wrote: >>> For larger files, you can not use the default mount options anymore! >>> You must use nfsvers=3 instead on nfsver=2 (and use tcp instead of udp) >> >> Hi Hans, Thanks for this. I will try it on Monday. But again, *this has >> been working for years.* I've been copying a file > 2 GB every two weeks >> for years, successfully, without using this option. It has only now >> stopped working AFTER I installed 10.3 on the server. I haven't changed >> the client - where the mount request is made. >> >> Something has broken backwards compatibility and I'd like to discover >> what. > --- > The name of the nfs clients and server packages were renamed > in 10.3 -- that's the first different (that shouldn't make a difference). > The next thing -- as near as I can tell, 10.3 defaults to NFS4.
I don't have v4 running, but I do appear to have some v2 mounts. Now I know about /proc/mounts, I'll see if I can find a client machine that admits to owning the traffic: suse1:~# nfsstat Server rpc stats: calls badcalls badauth badclnt xdrcall 27875534 1 1 0 0 Server nfs v2: null getattr setattr root lookup readlink 1 0% 1418162 17% 58016 0% 0 0% 1987379 23% 479859 5% read wrcache write create remove rename 3509146 42% 0 0% 493881 5% 58032 0% 27 0% 6 0% link symlink mkdir rmdir readdir fsstat 0 0% 290496 3% 14 0% 5 0% 2308 0% 5 0% Server nfs v3: null getattr setattr lookup access readlink 20 0% 5615777 28% 83718 0% 6024169 30% 1843591 9% 2735877 13% read write create mkdir symlink mknod 2390416 12% 773094 3% 16955 0% 1427 0% 25 0% 0 0% remove rmdir rename link readdir readdirplus 1638 0% 336 0% 16125 0% 77 0% 2232 0% 34855 0% fsstat fsinfo pathconf commit 1180 0% 29 0% 0 0% 34800 0% I think I chose not to switch it on when I set up the NFS server. > At > least this was what I found out when I ran into the same problems in > 10.3. I "upgraded" the packages to the working nfs packages in 10.2 > and things went back to normal and started working. I'd seen your problem in the archive but I wasn't sure how similar the symptoms are and I didn't want to start a new installation by putting non-standard parts in the engine. If it's configuration, I hope to find my mistake; if it's a bug, I hope we can identify it so it can be fixed. <snip> > NFSv4 also seems to need another daemon or two -- some sort of > id mapper, at least. Might be useful in some environments, but until I > complete upgrades on my machines, I am sticking with SuSE10.2's NFS > images as they just "worked" for me. I'd agree that there doesn't seem any point in my environment in moving to V4. > Good luck, > Linda Thanks, Dave -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
