On Fri, Jul 20, 2001 at 07:26:21PM -0700, Francois Gouget wrote:
>I don't know of a reference book that would be specifically about NFS
> but you can have a look at "The Design and Implementation of the 4.4BSD
> Operating System" by McKusik, Bostic, Karels and Quarterman. Chapter 9
> (about 25
On Fri, Jul 20, 2001 at 07:26:21PM -0700, Francois Gouget wrote:
>Well, of course you can bet that all these issues have been taken
> into account in the design of the NFS protocol.
>But actually this touches an important aspect of NFS servers: by
> design/philosophy they are stateless. Thi
On 17 Jul 2001, Brian May wrote:
[...]
> I have heard though, that NFS uses RPC, and RPC doesn't do anything
> this sophisticated. Rather, if the server doesn't respond in time, the
> client sends the request again.
>
> This is OK for requests like "read file", which don't affect the state
> of th
On Tue, Jul 17, 2001 at 03:47:30AM +0200, Jean-Baptiste Note wrote:
>
> > Thankfully, I forget the details[0]. From experience, no, it won't be
> > exactly hosed: you'll end up with a .nfs004950384672385721380937 file that
> > will grow and eventually fill up the partition... nothing an rm -rf /
* Jean-Baptiste Note ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) spake thusly:
>
...
>
> from my own limited experience, stale mounts are not a problem if you
> can unmount then mount again the partition containing the "damaged"
> export. Note that mount -o remount doesnt do the trick, but umount then
> mount does it
On Tue, Jul 17, 2001 at 06:53:51PM +1000, Steve Kowalik wrote:
| On Tue, Jul 17, 2001 at 04:05:10PM +1000, Brian May uttered:
| > Well, in theory, all UDP packets could be numbered, much like TCP
| > packets, and you get exactly the same reliability TCP offers. This
|
| I doubt that. UDP isn't a co
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
D-Man <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Ok, yeah. I'm not worried about congestion on my home LAN, I was just
>curios about (theoretical) reliability knowing it used UDP.
To give you a perspective:
Lots of people run mission critical stuff over NFS and have done
so for
On Tue, Jul 17, 2001 at 04:05:10PM +1000, Brian May uttered:
> Well, in theory, all UDP packets could be numbered, much like TCP
> packets, and you get exactly the same reliability TCP offers. This
I doubt that. UDP isn't a connection oriented protocol, and as such, it
can't deal with a packet out
> "D-Man" == D-Man <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
D-Man> Interesting ... from my understanding UDP is a
D-Man> connectionless protocol, and as such packets aren't
D-Man> guaranteed to arrive at the destination. It seems to me
D-Man> that for a file system, you really want all th
Thankfully, I forget the details[0]. From experience, no, it won't be
exactly hosed: you'll end up with a .nfs004950384672385721380937 file that
will grow and eventually fill up the partition... nothing an rm -rf / won't
fix. And then there's negative cookies and stale mounts that require a re
On Mon, Jul 16, 2001 at 12:13:10PM -0700, Francois Gouget wrote:
| On Mon, 16 Jul 2001, D-Man wrote:
| > On Mon, Jul 16, 2001 at 12:45:22PM -0500, Dimitri Maziuk wrote:
| > | * D-Man ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) spake thusly:
| > | ...
| > | > Ok, that makes sense. How about if probability leaves us behind
* D-Man ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) spake thusly:
> On Mon, Jul 16, 2001 at 01:43:34PM -0500, Dimitri Maziuk wrote:
...
> | There are other networked file systems out there, like Coda, more modern
> | and arguably better than NFS. If you only need to support linux, why not
> | use one of them? Or [e]nbd?
On Mon, 16 Jul 2001, D-Man wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 16, 2001 at 12:45:22PM -0500, Dimitri Maziuk wrote:
> | * D-Man ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) spake thusly:
> | ...
> | > Ok, that makes sense. How about if probability leaves us behind
> | > and a packet is lost? Does NFS provide any way to correct for
> |
On Mon, Jul 16, 2001 at 01:43:34PM -0500, Dimitri Maziuk wrote:
| * D-Man ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) spake thusly:
| ...
| >
| > Now suppose just the right packets are lost and the RPC call ends up
| > matching a different, existant, procedure that doesn't have the
| > intended effect ... sounds like i
* D-Man ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) spake thusly:
...
>
> Now suppose just the right packets are lost and the RPC call ends up
> matching a different, existant, procedure that doesn't have the
> intended effect ... sounds like it would be a good idea to
> make NFS over TCP stable :-).
Well, RPC has i
On Mon, Jul 16, 2001 at 12:45:22PM -0500, Dimitri Maziuk wrote:
| * D-Man ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) spake thusly:
| ...
| > Ok, that makes sense. How about if probability leaves us behind
| > and a packet is lost? Does NFS provide any way to correct for
| > that or will your filesystem be hosed?
|
| T
* D-Man ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) spake thusly:
...
> Ok, that makes sense. How about if probability leaves us behind and a
> packet is lost? Does NFS provide any way to correct for that or will
> your filesystem be hosed?
Thankfully, I forget the details[0]. From experience, no, it won't be
exactly
On Mon, Jul 16, 2001 at 11:44:54AM -0500, Dimitri Maziuk wrote:
| * D-Man ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) spake thusly:
| ...
| > Interesting ... from my understanding UDP is a connectionless
| > protocol, and as such packets aren't guaranteed to arrive at the
| > destination. It seems to me that for a file
* D-Man ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) spake thusly:
...
> Interesting ... from my understanding UDP is a connectionless
> protocol, and as such packets aren't guaranteed to arrive at the
> destination. It seems to me that for a file system, you really want
> all the packets to arrive. How is this not a pr
On Mon, Jul 16, 2001 at 03:56:02PM +1000, Brian May wrote:
| > "Jeremy" == Jeremy Gaddis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|
| Jeremy> Two possible suggestions: - tunnel the NFS traffic over an
| Jeremy> SSH traffic (similar to remote X sessions)
|
| Can you use SSH to tunnel UDP traffic???
"Timo \\" Blazko\ " Boewing" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> My question: is there a distributed fs that combines the advantages of
> both techs?
> as there are:
> NFS: mountable (more via combining with other things?)
> SCP: quite secure, may compress and crypt data
Have a look at sfs (http://www.
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Timo \"Blazko\" Boewing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Currently, I am using ssh/scp and NFS for syncing data between my woody
>desk and my FreeBSD thing.
>My question: is there a distributed fs that combines the advantages of
>both techs?
A google search for "crypt
> "Jeremy" == Jeremy Gaddis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Jeremy> Two possible suggestions: - tunnel the NFS traffic over an
Jeremy> SSH traffic (similar to remote X sessions)
Can you use SSH to tunnel UDP traffic???
(I didn't think it was possible, and last I heard, NFS over TCP was
s
, July 15, 2001 9:34 PM
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subject: NFS alternative
Hello everyone!
Currently, I am using ssh/scp and NFS for syncing data between my woody
desk and my FreeBSD thing.
My question: is there a distributed fs that combines the advantages of
both techs?
as there are:
24 matches
Mail list logo
