"Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:
>
> Edgar Lovecraft <exim-list@???> wrote:
> > As to too the locking issues that were 'patched', this has more to do
> > with the systems you use, Linux has major problems with NFS and
> > locking, even today, Sun/HP/AIX/SGI/etc. support NFS much better.
>
> The Linux NFS client has supported NFS locking for years
> (since 2.2 or so).
> The Linux kernel NFS server also supports NFS locking, and has been
> really stable since kernel 2.4.something (also years).
Yes it has, the problems I have always had with linux and NFS locking
are across multiple clients accessing the same file:
i.e.
server => exports /nfs_share
client1 => mounts /nfs_share
client2 => mounts /nfs_share
client1 => app1 opens and locks /nfs_share/file
client1 => app2 sees the lock when accessing /nfs_share/file
client2 => app1 opens and locks /nfs_share/file
as it does not see /nfs_share/file as being locked
Now we have a major problem, as two different clients think they have
'exclusive' access to the shared file /nfs_share/file, when only ONE
of them should have access to the file at any given time.
Part of the reason that I had mentioned using SMB on linux (server and
client) is that I have never had these type of locking issues with SMB.
Now, none of this even touches on the performace problems I have had
with Linux and NFS. :)
> Now if you're running Linux 2.0 with the user level NFS server, then
> yes, NFS is flakey. But this is the 21st century you know ;)
All of the problems I have had are on recent installations of RH 7/8/9.
Again, all my testing was done with RedHat Linux as both the servers and
the clients.
This is all OT anyway, I am not saying that Linux cannot be used in this
way, just that I have had very bad experiences with it. :)
--
--EAL--
