From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ian Kent <raven@themaw.net>
Subject: Re: autofs illustrations
Date: Wed, 08 Nov 2006 22:00:32 +0800
Message-ID: <1162994432.3555.15.camel@localhost>
References: <200611071719.kA7HJSvl002639@cs.utexas.edu>
	<1162958395.3555.8.camel@localhost>  <4551DAE2.1080704@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <autofs-bounces@linux.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <4551DAE2.1080704@redhat.com>
List-Id: <autofs.vger.kernel.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/autofs>,
	<mailto:autofs-request@linux.kernel.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://linux.kernel.org/pipermail/autofs>
List-Post: <mailto:autofs@linux.kernel.org>
List-Help: <mailto:autofs-request@linux.kernel.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/autofs>,
	<mailto:autofs-request@linux.kernel.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: autofs-bounces@linux.kernel.org
Errors-To: autofs-bounces@linux.kernel.org
To: Peter Staubach <staubach@redhat.com>
Cc: autofs@linux.kernel.org

On Wed, 2006-11-08 at 08:25 -0500, Peter Staubach wrote:
> Ian Kent wrote:
> >
> >   
> >> Unprivileged ports and/or UDP are not viable options for us, so I am
> >> forced to increase the timeout from 5 minutes to 24 hours, which in
> >> practice means they are always mounted.  We have about 400 automounted
> >> filesystems, so the only long term solution for us is to try to coalesce
> >> them to less than 100.  Very painful.
> >>     
> >
> > Understood. We had similar constraints at my last employer.
> >
> > I'm not aware of any work being actively done on this.
> > Nobody that cares has any time at the moment.
> >
> >   
> 
> Actually, there is work on going to reduce the number of connections 
> from the
> client to the server from one per mount to one per client server 
> combination.
> Solaris has always done this and it works out quite well in practice.

Excellent.
Tell me more?

Ian