Mailinglist Archive: opensuse (3156 mails)

< Previous Next >
NFS sync vs. async mounts (was Re: [opensuse] OpenSuse 10.2 - Fortran compilation very slow through NFS network with a 64bit server and 32bit clients.)
  • From: Linda Walsh <suse@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2007 21:23:47 -0800
  • Message-id: <476B4DE3.6030001@xxxxxxxxx>
Randall R Schulz wrote:
In particular, you can get notification of an error (e.g., "disk full") on the reply to a request much later than that of the request which actually encountered the error. Software with complex ordering and error sensitive behavior can be seriously undermined by asynchronous NFS. E.g. one of the most subtle problems I ever debugged was corruption in Berkeley DB files when the aforementioned disk-full condition occurred on a file system being accessed by the BDB code over asynchronous NFS.
Ug! Running a 'db' over NFS? That's sounds
ugly -- especially for performance. I don't think NFS was
designed for such -- since to get any performance out of
NFS, the defaults are to cache information on the client.
That's not acceptable with a heavily shared database.
Even on local disks, I don't think anything but 'synchronous'
is recommended for critical database applications.

I suppose my assumption is that if someone had a
critical business application that they needed to be networked,
they'd more likely be using one of the Suse-Business editions
and not asking about performance questions on the open-suse
list...:-) But that is an assumption...:-) For "Fortran"
compilations, (development work), I'd strongly recommend
async operation as preferable for performance reasons. But
to each their own...:-)

To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx

< Previous Next >
Follow Ups