Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!think.com!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu!mouse
From: mouse@thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu (der Mouse)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: Another reason I hate NFS: Silent data loss!
Message-ID: <1991Jun22.132732.26117@thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu>
Date: 22 Jun 91 13:27:32 GMT
References: <4339.Jun1501.31.5191@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> <16553.Jun1903.00.5691@kramden.acf.nyu.edu>
Organization: McGill Research Centre for Intelligent Machines
Lines: 25

In article <16553.Jun1903.00.5691@kramden.acf.nyu.edu>, brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) writes:
> In article <1991Jun18.064615.21165@thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu> mouse@thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu (der Mouse) writes:
>> In article <4339.Jun1501.31.5191@kramden.acf.nyu.edu>, brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) writes:
>>> I just ran about twenty processes simultaneously, each feeding into
>>> its own output file in the same NFS-mounted directory.  [...]
>> Was it a hard mount?  Then report a bug to your vendor.  Otherwise,
>> you asked for it, you got it.
> Uh, nothing in the NFS documentation says ``soft mounts are buggy, do
> not use them.''

Well, it does say don't use them for read/write filesystems.  Since you
were writing to the filesystem....

> Hard mounts and soft mounts show similar failures.

Then bug your vendor.  We used to get blocks of nulls when our
cross-mounts were soft; once we made them hard, the only data loss I've
ever seen was due to two different client machines writing to the same
file at once.

					der Mouse

			old: mcgill-vision!mouse
			new: mouse@larry.mcrcim.mcgill.edu