NFSv4: mount -t nsf4 not the same as mount_newnfs?
Hello. I set up a NFSv4 server located on a FreeBSD 8.0/amd64 box (most recent world). It seems I successfully set up the NFSv4 service and this results in a successful mount of a file system by another FreeBSD 8.0 box. But their is a weirdnes I do not understand. Mounting the filessystem via mount_newnfs host:/path /path works fine, but not mount -t nfs4 host:/path /path. When doing the latter, I always get the error : Operation not supported by device What I'm doing wrong? Regards, Oliver P.S. Kernel has both NFSSERVER and NFSD, NFSCL and NFSCLIENT, /etc/rc.conf has nfsv4_server_enable="YES" nfsuserd_enable="YES" rpcbind_enable="YES" on serverside, on clientside, it's nfsuserd_enable="YES" nfscbd_enable="YES" ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: NFSv4: mount -t nsf4 not the same as mount_newnfs?
On Mon, 8 Feb 2010, O. Hartmann wrote: Mounting the filessystem via mount_newnfs host:/path /path Oh, and you should set: sysctl vfs.newnfs.locallocks_enable=0 in the server, since I haven't fixed the local locking yet. (This implies that apps/daemons running locally on the server won't see byte range locks performed by NFSv4 clients.) However, byte range locking between NFSv4 clients should work ok. rick ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: NFSv4: mount -t nsf4 not the same as mount_newnfs?
On Mon, 8 Feb 2010, O. Hartmann wrote: Mounting the filessystem via mount_newnfs host:/path /path works fine, but not mount -t nfs4 host:/path /path. The mount command can be either: mount -t nfs -o nfsv4 host:/path /path or mount -t newnfs -o nfsv4 host:/path /path (The above was what the old now removed nfs4 used.) Have fun with it, rick ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: NFSv4: mount -t nsf4 not the same as mount_newnfs?
On 02/08/10 15:08, Rick Macklem wrote: On Mon, 8 Feb 2010, O. Hartmann wrote: Mounting the filessystem via mount_newnfs host:/path /path Oh, and you should set: sysctl vfs.newnfs.locallocks_enable=0 in the server, since I haven't fixed the local locking yet. (This implies that apps/daemons running locally on the server won't see byte range locks performed by NFSv4 clients.) However, byte range locking between NFSv4 clients should work ok. rick ___ freebsd-sta...@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" Interesting, I see a lot of vfs.newfs-stuff on server-side, but not this specific OID. Do I miss something here? Regards, Oliver ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: NFSv4: mount -t nsf4 not the same as mount_newnfs?
On 02/08/10 15:01, Rick Macklem wrote: On Mon, 8 Feb 2010, O. Hartmann wrote: Mounting the filessystem via mount_newnfs host:/path /path works fine, but not mount -t nfs4 host:/path /path. The mount command can be either: mount -t nfs -o nfsv4 host:/path /path or mount -t newnfs -o nfsv4 host:/path /path (The above was what the old now removed nfs4 used.) Have fun with it, rick So I guess the above one is the more 'transparent' one with respect to the future, when NFSv4 gets mature and its way as matured into the kernel? I tried the above and it works. But it seems, that only UFS2 filesystems can be mounted by the client. When trying mounting a filesystem residing on ZFS, it fails. Mounting works, but when try to access or doing a simple 'ls', I get ls: /backup: Permission denied On server side, /etc/exports looks like -- V4: / -sec=sys:krb5 #IPv4# /backup #IPv4# -- Is there still an issue with ZFS? Regards, Oliver ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: NFSv4: mount -t nsf4 not the same as mount_newnfs?
On Mon, 8 Feb 2010, O. Hartmann wrote: Oh, and you should set: sysctl vfs.newnfs.locallocks_enable=0 in the server, since I haven't fixed the local locking yet. (This implies that apps/daemons running locally on the server won't see byte range locks performed by NFSv4 clients.) However, byte range locking between NFSv4 clients should work ok. Interesting, I see a lot of vfs.newfs-stuff on server-side, but not this specific OID. Do I miss something here? Oops, make that vfs.newnfs.enable_locallocks=0 rick ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: NFSv4: mount -t nsf4 not the same as mount_newnfs?
On Mon, 8 Feb 2010, O. Hartmann wrote: So I guess the above one is the more 'transparent' one with respect to the future, when NFSv4 gets mature and its way as matured into the kernel? Yea, I'd only use "mount -t newnfs" if for some reason you want to test/use the experimental client for nfsv2,3 instead of the regular one. I tried the above and it works. But it seems, that only UFS2 filesystems can be mounted by the client. When trying mounting a filesystem residing on ZFS, it fails. Mounting works, but when try to access or doing a simple 'ls', I get ls: /backup: Permission denied On server side, /etc/exports looks like -- V4: / -sec=sys:krb5 #IPv4# /backup #IPv4# -- Is there still an issue with ZFS? For ZFS, everything from the "root" specified by the "V4:" line must be exported at this time. So, if "/" isn't exported, the above won't work for ZFS. You can either export "/" or move the NFSv4 root down to backup. For example, you could try: V4: /backup -sec=sys:krb5 /backup (assuming /backup is the ZFS volume) and then a mount like: mount -t nfs -o nfsv4 server:/ /mnt will mount /backup on /mnt rick ps: ZFS also has its own export stuff, but it is my understanding that putting a line in /etc/exports is sufficient. I've never used ZFS, so others will know more than I. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: NFSv4: mount -t nsf4 not the same as mount_newnfs?
On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 2:37 PM, Rick Macklem wrote: > ps: ZFS also has its own export stuff, but it is my understanding that >putting a line in /etc/exports is sufficient. I've never used ZFS, >so others will know more than I. > My understanding (from having used NFS and ZFS, haven't looked at the code) is that: The sharenfs property for a ZFS dataset gets written out to /etc/zfs/exports, which gets appended to the mountd command-line by default. Thus, you can use /etc/exports or sharenfs property, whichever is easier. # zfs get sharenfs storage/backup NAMEPROPERTY VALUE SOURCE storage/backup sharenfs -maproot=root 192.168.0.12 local # cat /etc/exports # cat /etc/zfs/exports # !!! DO NOT EDIT THIS FILE MANUALLY !!! /storage/backup -maproot=root 192.168.0.12 # pgrep -lf exports 1381 /usr/sbin/mountd -r -p 32000 /etc/exports /etc/zfs/exports -- Freddie Cash fjwc...@gmail.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: NFSv4: mount -t nsf4 not the same as mount_newnfs?
On 02/08/10 22:37, Rick Macklem wrote: On Mon, 8 Feb 2010, O. Hartmann wrote: So I guess the above one is the more 'transparent' one with respect to the future, when NFSv4 gets mature and its way as matured into the kernel? Yea, I'd only use "mount -t newnfs" if for some reason you want to test/use the experimental client for nfsv2,3 instead of the regular one. I tried the above and it works. But it seems, that only UFS2 filesystems can be mounted by the client. When trying mounting a filesystem residing on ZFS, it fails. Mounting works, but when try to access or doing a simple 'ls', I get ls: /backup: Permission denied On server side, /etc/exports looks like -- V4: / -sec=sys:krb5 #IPv4# /backup #IPv4# -- Is there still an issue with ZFS? For ZFS, everything from the "root" specified by the "V4:" line must be exported at this time. So, if "/" isn't exported, the above won't work for ZFS. You can either export "/" or move the NFSv4 root down to backup. For example, you could try: V4:/backup -sec=sys:krb5 /backup (assuming /backup is the ZFS volume) and then a mount like: mount -t nfs -o nfsv4 server:/ /mnt will mount /backup on /mnt rick ps: ZFS also has its own export stuff, but it is my understanding that putting a line in /etc/exports is sufficient. I've never used ZFS, so others will know more than I. Well, I guess I havn't uderstood everything of NFSv4. The 'concept' of the 'root' is new to me, maybe there are some deeper explanation of the purpose? Are there supposed to be more than one 'root' enries or only one? At this very moment mounting seems to work, but I always get a 'permission denied' error on every ZFS exported filesystem. Doing the same with UFS2 filesystems, everything works as expected. Is there a way to inspect the exports and mounts for the used NFS-protocol? When issuing 'mount', the 'backup' mount is repoted to be 'newnfs', I assume this reflects NFSv4 being used, now I need to figure out what's going wrong with the ZFS export. NFS export of the ZFS filesystem is enabled, but as far as I know, this feature is not used in FreeBSD since ZFS in FreeBSD lacks of the capabilities of autonomously exporting its via NFS - well, I'm not an expert in this matter. Thanks a lot, Oliver ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: NFSv4: mount -t nsf4 not the same as mount_newnfs?
On Tue, 9 Feb 2010, O. Hartmann wrote:
Well, I guess I havn't uderstood everything of NFSv4. The 'concept' of the
'root' is new to me, maybe there are some deeper explanation of the purpose?
Are there supposed to be more than one 'root' enries or only one?
Only to specify different security flavours for different client host
IP#s. There is only one "root" location in the file system tree. This
was done for NFSv4 to avoid any need for the mount protocol. See below.
At this very moment mounting seems to work, but I always get a 'permission
denied' error on every ZFS exported filesystem. Doing the same with UFS2
filesystems, everything works as expected.
In NFSv4 "mount" does very little, since it does not use the mount
protocol. It basically passes a "pathname" from the NFSv4 "root" into
the kernel for later use. (Since UFS doesn't actually check exports, the
experimental server checks them, but "cheats" and allows a minimal set
of NFSv4 Operations on non-exported volumes, so that this "pathname" can
be traversed to the exported volume.
At this time ZFS checks exports. As such everything in the tree from the
"root" specified by the "V4:" line must be exported for ZFS to work. I
believe others have gotten a ZFS export to work, but I have no experience
with it at this time.
Is there a way to inspect the exports and mounts for the used NFS-protocol?
Not that I am aware. (Excluding ZFS, which I don't know anything about,
the /etc/exports file specifies the exports.)
When issuing 'mount', the 'backup' mount is repoted to be 'newnfs', I assume
this reflects NFSv4 being used, now I need to figure out what's going wrong
with the ZFS export. NFS export of the ZFS filesystem is enabled, but as far
as I know, this feature is not used in FreeBSD since ZFS in FreeBSD lacks of
the capabilities of autonomously exporting its via NFS - well, I'm not an
expert in this matter.
I'm definitely not a ZFS expert either:-) I think the mount command is
showing you that the mount point was created ("newnfs" refers to the
experimental client), but as noted above, that doesn't indicate that
it is accessible. (If you haven't tried moving the "V4: /backup ..."
that moves the NFSv4 "root" to /backup, you should do that and see
how it goes.)
Good luck with it, rick
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
