Re: NewNFS vs. oldNFS for 10.0?

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?
> >>
> >> 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 standards and seems to have proven itself in
> >> some quite heavy traffic environments.
> >>
> >> Is there any reason to keep oldNFS around other than nostalgic?
> >
> > It can probably be removed.  It's kind of handy to keep around as long as 8.x
> > is around since it uses oldNFS by default as it makes merging bugfixes to the
> > NFS client a bit easier (you fix both clients in HEAD and can then just svn
> > merge both of those to 8 and 9).  Having several fixes to the NFS client
> > recently and being in a position of still using 8.x with oldNFS in production,
> > I would prefer to not remove it quite yet.
> 
> Do you have a timeframe on the sunset of oldNFS in HEAD so we can communicate
> a) that oldNFS won't be in 10.0; and b) it will go on date X?

I thought I implied one above: when 8.x is EOL'd.  However, that has more to do
with developer convience.  It's actually a PITA to use the old NFS client even
on 9.0.

> Would it make sense to make oldNFS more difficult to compile into the kernel
> on HEAD to notify all those with legacy kernel config files?

No.  The old client doesn't work out of the box unless you change your fstab
to s/nfs/oldnfs/.  Also, tools like nfsstat don't work with the old nfs client
either.

Do you have an actual reason for wanting this change?  As someone who is actively
working on NFS (and applying and testing fixes on both old and new) I'd like to
keep the old one for now.  Does that break something for you?

-- 
John Baldwin