[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: NFS recommendation



Jonathan Ben-Avraham wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 4 Jun 1999, Udi Finkelstein wrote:
> 
> > Hi,
> >
> [snip]
> > with RedHat, so it boils down to RH5.2, RH6.0, or RH6.0 with the latest 2.2.x
> > kernel. I would use 5.2 if it's more mature unless it's NFS performance is
> > **substantially** lower than 6.0's performance. Also notice we *don't* use an
> > SMP machine, so all the 2.2.x improvements in SMP are not relevant.
> >
> [snip]
> > The purpose of this server is to serve as a large **temporary file** storage
> > location. This usually involves object files, executables, and simulation data
> > files. All data is non essential, and can be easily recreated, even if I
> > completely reformat the system. The only reason we added it was the
> > prohibitively high price of adding fiber channel disks to our main NetApp F720
> > NFS server. We don't want it to be full with gigabytes of temp files.
> >
> > Our clients are all UltraSparc machines, running Solaris 2.5.1 or 2.6 .
> >
> > Please notice that I'm *NOT* a sysadmin. My main job is hardware design, and
> > I'm not supposed to spend too much time on this (my bosses wants me to spend
> > my time on hardware design, not on system administration). I need
> > recommendations for a configuration that installs simply, and that works
> > *reasonably* well as far as speed and reliability. even though it's a temp
> > file server, file corruptions on heavy load during work are not really
> > welcomed...
> >
> > (My experience with RedHat 5.2 was wonderfull. Within 30 minutes of opening up
> > the brand new Compaq box we got, I booted a Cheapbytes RH5.2 CD, zapped the
> > Win95 system, and had it running a private FTP server. Out of these 30
> > minutes, only 10 minutes was spent at the keyboard answering questions...)
> >
> > thanks,
> > Udi
> >
> >
> 
> Be advised that I have had many problems with NFS compatibility
> between a RedHat 5.2 server and solaris 2.6 and 2.7 clients. Typical
> problems are that when I try to run executables on the Linux server I get
> a "text file busy" message. Also, after unpacking 15-20Mb compressed files
> over NFS there is often a lot of file corruption, sometimes on other files
> in the mounted partition. Could be that there's some silly configuration
> error I'm making but you'd better test your installation with large file
> transfers before you tell your user community that its ok.
> 
> I would be interested in hearing others' experience using a Linux NFS
> server with Solaris clients in a heavily loaded environment.
On my NFS  (linux rh5.2 server 2.0.36 and sun-solaris 2.5.1 cliuents)
disk on linux:
if you read a file on the solaris system from nfs it's o.k.
then you change the file from the linux machine, and then if
you try again to access the file from solris , you get a 'stale nfs
handle'

regards
erez.
> 
> TIA,
> 
>  - yba
> 
>    EE 77 7F 30 4A 64 2E C5  83 5F E7 49 A6 82 29 BA    ~. .~   TclTek Ltd.
>  =}-------------------------------------------------ooO--U--Ooo-----------{=
>   - benavrhm@tcltek.co.il - tel: +972.52.670.353, http://www.tcltek.co.il -