dyer@spdcc.COM (Steve Dyer) (02/26/91)
>BUT, I don't want people who are considering using or buying A/UX to get >the idea that EVERYONE has trouble with NFS on A/UX: it just ain't so. That's because not everyone operates in the same environment. Just because you haven't seen the problem doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It's a problem with the Sun NFS sample implementation which most vendors use more or less verbatim. The problem is, under certain conditions of server and network load, one or more of a series of nonidempotent NFS requests which were scrambled (i.e. unserialized) by biod may be retransmitted, and this can cause problems of 'holes' appearing in files. The loader seemed to be a particularly good way to produce this, both with A/UX and with early versions of NFS for IBM AIX PS/2. We saw this at Athena early in our use of A/UX and reported it (along with our sample fixes) many months ago. -- Steve Dyer dyer@ursa-major.spdcc.com aka {ima,harvard,rayssd,linus,m2c}!spdcc!dyer dyer@arktouros.mit.edu, dyer@hstbme.mit.edu
dyer@spdcc.COM (Steve Dyer) (02/26/91)
You might try running without starting the 'biod' processes.
This will close one of the ways that you can get into trouble.
It's not a complete solution, and it does have the disadvantage
of reduced performance. However, if it's a matter of getting
work done or not, it's worth a try.
--
Steve Dyer
dyer@ursa-major.spdcc.com aka {ima,harvard,rayssd,linus,m2c}!spdcc!dyer
dyer@arktouros.mit.edu, dyer@hstbme.mit.eduabm@alan.aux.apple.com (Alan Mimms) (02/28/91)
In article <6604@spdcc.SPDCC.COM>, dyer@spdcc.COM (Steve Dyer) writes: |> >BUT, I don't want people who are considering using or buying A/UX to get |> >the idea that EVERYONE has trouble with NFS on A/UX: it just ain't so. |> |> That's because not everyone operates in the same environment. Just |> because you haven't seen the problem doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Steve, I seem to have failed miserably in getting one of the most important things across: I DON'T believe that (point of view [a]) "just because I haven't seen something it doesn't exist". I believe that (point of view [b]) "just because you have seen something it may only exist for you in your circumstances". The problem under discussion MAY WELL be (and looks like probably is) a legitimate bug in A/UX. But it might not be as well. I wanted to make sure people understood the difference between point of view [a] and point of view [b]. I more or less ASSUMED it was a bug in A/UX from the start, since so many people seem to have been bit by it... I really am NOT a pigheaded ass who believes Apple can do no wrong! On the contrary: I, as a representative of Apple have done MUCH wrong, personally -- it's these past sins and other obviously stupid or wrong things that Apple has done that drive me to try to right what few wrongs I can. |> [very plausible explanation for problem deleted] |> We saw this at Athena early in our use of A/UX and reported it (along |> with our sample fixes) many months ago. It takes many months to make a new A/UX release. Perhaps the fix was applied and made it into A/UX 2.0.1. I'm looking into this. |> -- |> Steve Dyer |> dyer@ursa-major.spdcc.com aka {ima,harvard,rayssd,linus,m2c}!spdcc!dyer |> dyer@arktouros.mit.edu, dyer@hstbme.mit.edu -- Alan Mimms (alan@apple.com, ...!apple!alan) | My opinions are generally A/UX X group | pretty worthless, but Apple Computer | they *are* my own... "Laugha whila you can, monkey boy..." -- John Whorfin in Buckaroo Banzai "Never rub another man's rhubarb" -- The Joker in BatMan
maples@ddtisvr@uunet.uu.net (Greg Maples) (03/02/91)
In article <6605@spdcc.SPDCC.COM> dyer@spdcc.COM (Steve Dyer) writes: >You might try running without starting the 'biod' processes. >This will close one of the ways that you can get into trouble. >It's not a complete solution, and it does have the disadvantage >of reduced performance. However, if it's a matter of getting >work done or not, it's worth a try. Nice try, but BZZZZZZZZTTTT!!! In theory, this might work, but since this is exactly the same advice we got here for our NFS problems, and saw very little change, forget it. Big links dont work. Period. Apple: Face up to it... folks from MIT send us cordial notes saying: "Oh yeah, the zero block error... told Apple about it months ago..." Sun says: "Apple A/UX wont even pass a basic NFS config test under load" Users say: "Stop ignoring this, you DO have a problem!" I say: "I've been telling you this stuff for nine months!!!" Please, wake up Apple! Your NFS port is flawed, 1) Admit it. 2) Document it. 3) Patch it. 4) Release the next system without it. -- Greg Maples | These are my opinions, not yours. Keep your Systems Group Leader | hands off 'em. They're also not the opinions DuPont Design Technologies | of my employer or yours. So there. (c) 1990 maples%ddtisvr@uunet.uu.net | The preceding is an opinion which is mine.
jaya@ra.src.umd.edu (Jaya Kanal) (03/20/91)
Thanks to all who responded to my posting about NFS mount problems w/our AUX machine. I removed the extra tabs, as several people had indicated, but it turned out that I was missing a key piece of information (thanks Vicki Brown for the explanation ) - I had failed to include the file system type, nfs, in the fstab file. The directories are mounting fine now. *********************************** Jaya Kanal, Systems Research Center U of MD College Park (jaya@ra.src.umd.edu)