Re: NewNFS vs. oldNFS for 10.0?

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 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.
> 
Just fyi, "nfsstat -o" should still report stats for the old NFS.
(I suspect John meant that it does not by default.)

> 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