==> Regarding Re: [autofs] /net support; Ian Kent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> adds:
raven> On Mon, 2006-10-30 at 19:14 -0500, David Meleedy wrote: >> >> > My system defaults to tcp nfs v3 if no options are specified. Given that >> > autofs now supports lazy mounts and unmounts, Is there a compelling reason >> > not to use TCP and/or version 3 mounts for the LAN? >> >> >> Well, my understanding of TCP is that it uses a sliding window/packet >> acknowledgment system to transfer data. I would imagine that this >> would incur a bandwidth overhead vs. UDP. So, given that it's more >> efficient to use UDP on the LAN, that is the behavior I had wanted to >> set up. raven> That very much depends on usage. raven> If you have a bunch of clients that typically open and load files of raven> potentially several hundred megabytes then UDP retransmits can become a raven> problem. raven> But then if traffic is light there's not much to be gained and if there raven> are traffic spikes possibly something to be lost. >> >> > To answer your question directly, no, there isn't a way to specify mount >> > options per server. >> >> I didn't think there would be at the moment. Perhaps there would >> be a way to set this up with automounter variables, or some other >> mechanism. I guess what I had been hoping for is that automounter >> could somehow detect how long it takes to contact a given server, >> and then depending on the lag, it would set the mount to be UDP >> for a short lag, or TCP version 3 for a long one. raven> This is actually fairly hard to do as ping responses can be so variable raven> for all sorts reasons. Not sure how to go about this one. Well, perhaps if the WAN is a different subnet we could reuse some of the code from the replicated server support. But you are right, ping times are highly unreliable for making such decisions. -Jeff _______________________________________________ autofs mailing list [email protected] http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/autofs
