On Fri, Dec 09, 2011 at 01:31:08PM -0500, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: > On 12/08/2011 12:45 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > > Yes, if you're using NFSv4 then the client and server should each run > > both daemons. > > ah, thanks. > > >> If so, what functionality am i losing out on by not running it? > > > > You lose NFSv4.0 delegations, which depend on the ability for the server > > to contact the client to send delegation recalls. Delegations are > > optional, so you won't lose correctness, but you may lose some > > performance. > > Thanks, that's useful. Do the clients need to run cachefilesd as well > to take advantage of delegation? No. > Is there a document where i could find > this sort of information without adding noise to the list? Hm, it should probably be in the FAQ. I think we want to make http://wiki.linux-nfs.org/ the place to go for Linux NFS information, so if you can't find this under there somewhere, let's think about where to put it. Suggestions welcomed. > > If you're using only v2, v3, or v4.1, that doesn't matter. (v2 and v3 > > lack delegations, and v4.1 sends callbacks over existing > > client-established connections). > > OK, gotcha. Is it possible to use 4.1 with linux kernel 3.1 and > nfs-utils 1.2.5, or would i need to pull a more recent version? It should be possible. 4.1 is somewhat new, though. --b. -- 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
