Another reason I hate NFS: Silent data loss!
Keith McNeill
mcneill at eplrx7.uucp
Thu Jun 20 00:28:36 AEST 1991
>From article <16553.Jun1903.00.5691 at kramden.acf.nyu.edu>, by brnstnd at kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein):
> In article <1991Jun18.064615.21165 at thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu> mouse at thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu (der Mouse) writes:
>> In article <4339.Jun1501.31.5191 at kramden.acf.nyu.edu>, brnstnd at kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) writes:
>> > I just ran about twenty processes simultaneously, each feeding into
>> > its own output file in the same NFS-mounted directory. About half
>> > the data was lost: truncated files, blocks full of zeros, etc.
>> Was it a hard mount? Then report a bug to your vendor. Otherwise, you
>> asked for it, you got it.
>
> Uh, nothing in the NFS documentation says ``soft mounts are buggy, do
> not use them.'' Hard mounts and soft mounts show similar failures.
>
> ---Dan
But it does say...
>From the SunOS Systems Admin Manual:
"Use the hard option with any file hierarchies you mount read-write."
If you have problems with hard mounts destroying data then you have
a buggy NFS version.
Keith
Keith McNeill | Du Pont Company
eplrx7!mcneill at uunet.uu.net | Engineering Physics Laboratory
(302) 695-9353/7395 | P.O. Box 80357
| Wilmington, Delaware 19880-0357
--
Keith McNeill | Du Pont Company
eplrx7!mcneill at uunet.uu.net | Engineering Physics Laboratory
(302) 695-9353/7395 | P.O. Box 80357
| Wilmington, Delaware 19880-0357
--
The UUCP Mailer
More information about the Comp.unix.wizards
mailing list