On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 11:47:00AM +0200, Marc Olzheim wrote: > On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 12:08:57PM -0400, Brian Fundakowski Feldman wrote: > > Alright, this will do synchronous, instead of short, writes (also, > > of course, not deadlock the system) if you are trying to use an > > excessively large buffer size. > > > > <http://green.homeunix.org/~green/nfs_client.deadlock.patch> > > <http://green.homeunix.org/~green/nfs_client.deadlock.HEAD.patch> > > Will this be incorporated in time for 5.4 ? It really needs someone else to review the code changes more than just conceptually to make this kind of an adjustment before release. It is not truly an optimal solution, as fully synchronous writes are not necessary; just limiting the "write window" size and requiring posted transactions to complete before queueing up more is. Doing that is more error-prone, however, and would I think complicate things just to optimize the speed of a rare case. Still, there are probably a few who would object, in which case they should do the work of optimizing that side case ;) There's still missing an actual mount_nfs(8) configuration flag and documentation, but those things are trivial. (Forwarded on to -current as well, for additional eyes/testers.) -- Brian Fundakowski Feldman \'[ FreeBSD ]''''''''''\ <> green_at_FreeBSD.org \ The Power to Serve! \ Opinions expressed are my own. \,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\Received on Tue May 03 2005 - 11:59:10 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:33 UTC