From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Trond Myklebust Subject: Re: NFS utils package, and an fsx question Date: 13 May 2002 07:35:10 +0200 Sender: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Message-ID: References: <3CDF247A.E7106AA4@attbi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: NFS maillist Return-path: Received: from pat.uio.no ([129.240.130.16]) by usw-sf-list1.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 3.31-VA-mm2 #1 (Debian)) id 1778UU-0007mr-00 for ; Sun, 12 May 2002 22:35:22 -0700 To: Tom McNeal In-Reply-To: <3CDF247A.E7106AA4@attbi.com> Errors-To: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Discussion of NFS under Linux development, interoperability, and testing. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: >>>>> " " == Tom McNeal writes: > The tests consist of the 4 2002 Connectathon tests suites > (basic, general, special, and lock), fsx, a duplicate request > cache exerciser, and bonnie++, all running simultaneously > overnight. I tested a 2.4.18 and 2.2.19 UP client against > 2.4 and 2.2 UP servers. The failure rate was less than 1%, > primarily due to interaction between special and general tests > that I haven't quite figured out yet. Any details on the failures? 2.4.18 was tested extensively at Cthon with no problems being observed... Cheers, Trond _______________________________________________________________ Have big pipes? SourceForge.net is looking for download mirrors. We supply the hardware. You get the recognition. Email Us: bandwidth@sourceforge.net _______________________________________________ NFS maillist - NFS@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs