Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!caen!spool.mu.edu!uunet!midway!clout!chinet!les
From: les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: Another reason I hate NFS: Silent data loss!
Message-ID: <1991Jun24.153339.3601@chinet.chi.il.us>
Date: 24 Jun 91 15:33:39 GMT
Article-I.D.: chinet.1991Jun24.153339.3601
References: <4339.Jun1501.31.5191@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> <1991Jun18.064615.21165@thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu> <4282@motcsd.csd.mot.com>
Organization: Chinet - Chicago Public Access UNIX
Lines: 16

In article <4282@motcsd.csd.mot.com> lance@motcsd.csd.mot.com (lance.norskog) writes:

>AT&T's RFS runs solid as a rock, once you figure out how to configure it.
>(The latter is a muthuh of a learning curve.)  Use it if you can.

The sematics of killing any process that happens to have a file open over
RFS or is in an RFS-mounted directory when the RFS mount is broken is
a little annoying, though.  It's especially annoying in combination with
the AT&T DOS server software which handles several users per server
process.  If one user has a file open across an RFS mount when the
RFS like is broken, suddenly 6 DOS users lose their server (and their
work).  If the DOS server in question happens to be the parent process,
everyone gets disconnected.

Les Mikesell
  les@chinet.chi.il.us