Re: NewNFS vs. oldNFS for 10.0?

2013-03-18 Thread Andre Oppermann
On 16.03.2013 01:44, Peter Wemm wrote: On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 2:03 PM, John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote: On Friday, March 15, 2013 11:24:32 am Andre Oppermann wrote: On 15.03.2013 14:46, John Baldwin wrote: On Friday, March 15, 2013 9:40:56 am Andre Oppermann wrote: Hi Rick, all, is

Re: NewNFS vs. oldNFS for 10.0?

2013-03-18 Thread Andre Oppermann
On 15.03.2013 15:08, Rick Macklem wrote: Lars Eggert wrote: Hi, this reminds me that I ran into an issue lately with the new NFS and locking for NFSv3 mounts on a client that ran -CURRENT and a server that ran -STABLE. When I ran portmaster -a on the client, which mounted /usr/ports and

Re: NewNFS vs. oldNFS for 10.0?

2013-03-18 Thread Peter Holm
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 01:43:24PM +0100, Andre Oppermann wrote: On 15.03.2013 15:08, Rick Macklem wrote: Lars Eggert wrote: Hi, this reminds me that I ran into an issue lately with the new NFS and locking for NFSv3 mounts on a client that ran -CURRENT and a server that ran -STABLE.

NewNFS vs. oldNFS for 10.0?

2013-03-15 Thread Andre Oppermann
Hi Rick, all, is there a plan to decide for one NFS implementation for FreeBSD 10.0, or to keep both around indefinately? I'm talking about: oldNFS in sys/{nfs, nfsclient, nfsserver} NFSv2+NFSv3 newNFS in sys/fs/{nfs, nfsclient, nfsserver} NFSv2+NFSv3+NFSv4 NewNFS supports newer NFS

Re: NewNFS vs. oldNFS for 10.0?

2013-03-15 Thread Rick Macklem
Andre Oppermann wrote: Hi Rick, all, is there a plan to decide for one NFS implementation for FreeBSD 10.0, or to keep both around indefinately? I'm talking about: oldNFS in sys/{nfs, nfsclient, nfsserver} NFSv2+NFSv3 newNFS in sys/fs/{nfs, nfsclient, nfsserver} NFSv2+NFSv3+NFSv4

Re: NewNFS vs. oldNFS for 10.0?

2013-03-15 Thread Eggert, Lars
Hi, this reminds me that I ran into an issue lately with the new NFS and locking for NFSv3 mounts on a client that ran -CURRENT and a server that ran -STABLE. When I ran portmaster -a on the client, which mounted /usr/ports and /usr/local, as well as the location of the respective sqlite

Re: NewNFS vs. oldNFS for 10.0?

2013-03-15 Thread Rick Macklem
Lars Eggert wrote: Hi, this reminds me that I ran into an issue lately with the new NFS and locking for NFSv3 mounts on a client that ran -CURRENT and a server that ran -STABLE. When I ran portmaster -a on the client, which mounted /usr/ports and /usr/local, as well as the location of

Re: NewNFS vs. oldNFS for 10.0?

2013-03-15 Thread Andre Oppermann
On 15.03.2013 15:01, Eggert, Lars wrote: Hi, this reminds me that I ran into an issue lately with the new NFS and locking for NFSv3 mounts on a client that ran -CURRENT and a server that ran -STABLE. When I ran portmaster -a on the client, which mounted /usr/ports and /usr/local, as well as

Re: NewNFS vs. oldNFS for 10.0?

2013-03-15 Thread John Baldwin
On Friday, March 15, 2013 9:40:56 am Andre Oppermann wrote: Hi Rick, all, is there a plan to decide for one NFS implementation for FreeBSD 10.0, or to keep both around indefinately? I'm talking about: oldNFS in sys/{nfs, nfsclient, nfsserver} NFSv2+NFSv3 newNFS in sys/fs/{nfs,

Re: NewNFS vs. oldNFS for 10.0?

2013-03-15 Thread Andre Oppermann
On 15.03.2013 14:46, John Baldwin wrote: On Friday, March 15, 2013 9:40:56 am Andre Oppermann wrote: Hi Rick, all, is there a plan to decide for one NFS implementation for FreeBSD 10.0, or to keep both around indefinately? I'm talking about: oldNFS in sys/{nfs, nfsclient, nfsserver}

Re: NewNFS vs. oldNFS for 10.0?

2013-03-15 Thread Alfred Perlstein
On 3/15/13 8:24 AM, Andre Oppermann wrote: On 15.03.2013 14:46, John Baldwin wrote: On Friday, March 15, 2013 9:40:56 am Andre Oppermann wrote: Hi Rick, all, is there a plan to decide for one NFS implementation for FreeBSD 10.0, or to keep both around indefinately? I'm talking about:

Re: NewNFS vs. oldNFS for 10.0?

2013-03-15 Thread Adrian Chadd
On 15 March 2013 09:55, Alfred Perlstein bri...@mu.org wrote: Finally, I think it is really premature to declare a sunset for the oldnfs until the users are gushing with approval over the new system. The flipside to this argument (and coming from you is kind of amusing :-) is that without any

Re: NewNFS vs. oldNFS for 10.0?

2013-03-15 Thread Alfred Perlstein
On 3/15/13 10:55 AM, Adrian Chadd wrote: On 15 March 2013 09:55, Alfred Perlstein bri...@mu.org wrote: Finally, I think it is really premature to declare a sunset for the oldnfs until the users are gushing with approval over the new system. The flipside to this argument (and coming from you

Re: NewNFS vs. oldNFS for 10.0?

2013-03-15 Thread Adrian Chadd
On 15 March 2013 11:11, Alfred Perlstein bri...@mu.org wrote: People in my org have been working with NFS and reporting issues for the past year. I'm quite certain that Doug White has reported issues due to missing certain caching features of the old code. This is not indicative that newNFS

Re: NewNFS vs. oldNFS for 10.0?

2013-03-15 Thread Freddie Cash
Isn't the general process (or at least past pattern) to: - have 1 release cycle with just the old code (aka 8.x with oldNFS) - have 1 release cycle with old and new code, default to old (aka 9.x with oldNFS + newNFS) - have 1 release cycle with old and new code, default to new (aka 10.x with

Re: NewNFS vs. oldNFS for 10.0?

2013-03-15 Thread John Baldwin
On Friday, March 15, 2013 11:24:32 am Andre Oppermann wrote: On 15.03.2013 14:46, John Baldwin wrote: On Friday, March 15, 2013 9:40:56 am Andre Oppermann wrote: Hi Rick, all, is there a plan to decide for one NFS implementation for FreeBSD 10.0, or to keep both around indefinately?

Re: NewNFS vs. oldNFS for 10.0?

2013-03-15 Thread Rick Macklem
Alfred Perlstein wrote: On 3/15/13 10:55 AM, Adrian Chadd wrote: On 15 March 2013 09:55, Alfred Perlstein bri...@mu.org wrote: Finally, I think it is really premature to declare a sunset for the oldnfs until the users are gushing with approval over the new system. The flipside to this

Re: NewNFS vs. oldNFS for 10.0?

2013-03-15 Thread Rick Macklem
John Baldwin wrote: On Friday, March 15, 2013 11:24:32 am Andre Oppermann wrote: On 15.03.2013 14:46, John Baldwin wrote: On Friday, March 15, 2013 9:40:56 am Andre Oppermann wrote: Hi Rick, all, is there a plan to decide for one NFS implementation for FreeBSD 10.0, or to keep

Re: NewNFS vs. oldNFS for 10.0?

2013-03-15 Thread Peter Wemm
On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 2:03 PM, John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote: On Friday, March 15, 2013 11:24:32 am Andre Oppermann wrote: On 15.03.2013 14:46, John Baldwin wrote: On Friday, March 15, 2013 9:40:56 am Andre Oppermann wrote: Hi Rick, all, is there a plan to decide for one NFS

Re: NewNFS vs. oldNFS for 10.0?

2013-03-15 Thread Rick Macklem
Freddie Cash wrote: Isn't the general process (or at least past pattern) to: - have 1 release cycle with just the old code (aka 8.x with oldNFS) - have 1 release cycle with old and new code, default to old (aka 9.x with oldNFS + newNFS) Actually, your numbering is out by one. 7.x - old only

Re: NewNFS vs. oldNFS for 10.0?

2013-03-15 Thread Rick Macklem
Peter Wemm wrote: On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 2:03 PM, John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote: On Friday, March 15, 2013 11:24:32 am Andre Oppermann wrote: On 15.03.2013 14:46, John Baldwin wrote: On Friday, March 15, 2013 9:40:56 am Andre Oppermann wrote: Hi Rick, all, is there a plan

Re: NewNFS vs. oldNFS for 10.0?

2013-03-15 Thread Rick Macklem
Andre Oppermann wrote: On 15.03.2013 15:01, Eggert, Lars wrote: Hi, this reminds me that I ran into an issue lately with the new NFS and locking for NFSv3 mounts on a client that ran -CURRENT and a server that ran -STABLE. When I ran portmaster -a on the client, which mounted