On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 01:30:58PM +0000, Myklebust, Trond wrote: > On Thu, 2013-04-25 at 09:29 -0400, bfields@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > My position is that we simply have no idea what order of magnitude even > > delay should be. And that in such a situation exponential backoff such > > as implemented in the synchronous case seems the reasonable default as > > it guarantees at worst doubling the delay while still bounding the > > long-term average frequency of retries. > > So we start with a 15 second delay, and then go to 60 seconds? I agree that a server should normally be doing the wait on its own if the wait would be on the order of an rpc round trip. So I'd be inclined to start with a delay that was an order of magnitude or two more than a round trip. And I'd expect NFS isn't common on networks with 1-second latencies. So the 1/10 second we're using in the synchronous case sounds closer to the right ballpark to me. --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
