> Fletcher Mattox wrote:
> ...
> > Unprivileged ports and/or UDP are not viable options for us, so I am
> > forced to increase the timeout from 5 minutes to 24 hours, which in
> > practice means they are always mounted.  We have about 400 automounted
> > filesystems, so the only long term solution for us is to try to coalesce
> > them to less than 100.  Very painful.
> 
> You have 400 automounted file systems, all of which need to be mounted at
> the same time?  

Not all of them, but certainly more than 100 of them, which seems to
be the limit we are talking about. 

> If so, I might suggest that static mounts might better serve
> your needs.  

Really?  I think this is the first time I have ever heard someone
advocate static mounts as a solution to a large number of filesystems
(especially ones that tend to appear and disappear frequently).
But you are right, and this is effectively the solution we arrived at
by increasing the timeout.

> Or, rethink the application and deployment.

I think that's what said in my penultimate sentence. :)

Thanks
Fletcher

_______________________________________________
autofs mailing list
[email protected]
http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/autofs

Reply via email to