On Nov. 03, 2008, 19:25 +0200, Jim Rees <rees@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Trond Myklebust wrote: > > BTW: NFSv4 + soft == BAD BAD BAD! > > Maybe this combination should be prohibited. Does it make any sense given > the stateful nature of v4? >From the usage perspective it allows the application to fail rather than stall. If it would have been implemented similar to "intr" and return an error to the app as if the system call had received an interrupt but under the covers the RPC will be processed to completion (or graceful cleanup) I think it might still make sense for nfs4. Until then this combination should at least be warned about. Benny > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
