nfsv41 mount semantics question

[Spencer Shepler]

As for Solaris, all NFS mounts are of type "nfs".
There will be a new vers=xx selection in the case that
an admin wants NFSv4.1 specifically.   Also at this point,
there will be no option to enable/disable pNFS functionality.
If it exists and the server supports the clients layout type
functionality, then the client will ask for and use layouts.

Spencer

On Mar 9, 2008, at 9:33 AM, Benny Halevy wrote:

> Muntz, Daniel wrote:
>> How about we do what Solaris does?  I don't know what that is, but  
>> it's
>
> first, please s/do/look at/ :)
> It will be nice to be compatible with Solaris, but you have to
> take into account the existing infrastructure and linux admins'
> established habits.
>
>> probably reasonable.  Might also be nice to have an option to disable
>> pnfs (assuming it's enabled by default by being part of 4.1),  
>> something
>> like '-o nopnfs' (forcing write-through the MDS).
>
> Agreed.
>
>>
>>   -Dan
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Dean Hildebrand [mailto:seattleplus at gmail.com]
>> Sent: Friday, March 07, 2008 11:34 AM
>> To: nfsv4 at linux-nfs.org
>> Subject: nfsv41 mount semantics question
>>
>> At our weekly linux pNFS meeting yesterday the issue of how to  
>> mount a
>> nfsv4.1 server arose.  We are looking for some clarification on  
>> how to
>> proceed with the implementation.
>>
>> The first issue is with regards to whether we should use a new mount
>> type (e.g., '-t nfs41') or instead rely on the 'nfsvers' parameter
>> (e.g., '-t nfs nfsvers=4.1' or '-t nfs4 nfsvers=4.1').
>>
>> It was pointed out that the long term goal is to remove the current
>> 'nfs4' mount type and use only a single 'nfs' mount type and rely  
>> on the
>> 'nfsvers' parameter to differentiate between versions.  Is this true?
>> (Note that the current nfs man page says the nfsvers parameter is not
>> supported for nfs4.) If so, should we implement the nfsv41 code to  
>> use
>> the mount type 'nfs'
>> and a nfsvers=4.1 (or 41)?
>>
>> Another issue is if we move to using a single mount type of 'nfs',  
>> what
>> should the default value of 'nfsvers' be?  I'm assuming that for the
>> near term it would be 'nfsvers=3'.  Would it depend on what is  
>> compiled
>> into the kernel?
>>
>> Anyways, we just want to get the conversation started at this  
>> point so
>> we can see what lies ahead.
>>
>> In summary, a few sample options:
>> '-t nfs nfsvers=[2,3,4,4.1]'
>> or
>> '-t [nfs,nfs4] nfsvers=[2,3] (for nfs) or nfsvers=[4,4.1] (for nfs4)'
>> or
>> '-t [nfs,nfs4,nfs41] nfsvers=[2,3]' - nfsvers for nfs type only
>>
>> Dean
>> _______________________________________________
>> NFSv4 mailing list
>> NFSv4 at linux-nfs.org
>> http://linux-nfs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nfsv4
>> _______________________________________________
>> NFSv4 mailing list
>> NFSv4 at linux-nfs.org
>> http://linux-nfs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nfsv4
>
> _______________________________________________
> NFSv4 mailing list
> NFSv4 at linux-nfs.org
> http://linux-nfs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nfsv4