On 4/16/2012 1:46 PM, Jeff Layton wrote:
NFS will generally return a different error if the process catches a
fatal signal, so a soft mount should not be necessary and is not
recommended anyway...
In any case, we loop indefinitely now in the NFS code when (for
instance) there's a loss of communication. Users are not generally
happy if that causes an error, since their applications start dying.
From the peanut gallery, I've always set an infinite loop with an
exponential backoff on the loss of communication. IE, in some code I
wrote for S3backer (a FUSE file system on top of Amazon EC3) a few years
ago (committed by Archie Cobbs).
The trade off is that your applications will try to submit requests if
you don't tell them "leave me alone, I can't service you now". The more
I think about it, the more it seems like failing silently. Isn't the
rule supposed to be "if you must fail, do it loudly and as soon as
possible"? Just my $0.02. Take it as you will.
--
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
