From: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
To: Jim Rees <rees@umich.edu>
Cc: John Hughes <john@Calva.COM>,
Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@netapp.com>,
linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Don't hang user processes if Kerberos ticket for nfs4 mount expires
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 21:03:08 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20111117210308.4c5156fd@corrin.poochiereds.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20111118015116.GA1959@umich.edu>
On Thu, 17 Nov 2011 20:51:16 -0500
Jim Rees <rees@umich.edu> wrote:
> I would argue that if you don't want your applications to stop working when
> your ticket expires, you shouldn't let the ticket expire. If you don't want
> to have to renew your ticket, you should use an infinite ticket lifetime.
>
That's the ideal situation, but shit happens, and losing a long-running
job can often be an expensive proposition.
> It sounds like you've made up your mind, but I would urge you to make this
> a mount option, analogous to the hard/soft mount option.
I've not made up my mind about anything, and in any case it's not my
decision to make. I think you need to convince Trond here... :)
I'm quite open to sane proposals as long as we can accomodate those who
are dependent on the current behavior. As I said before, when I
originally did the patches a couple of years ago, I sort of figured the
current behavior was a first approximation.
A mount option will be harder to implement than a rpc.gssd command-line
option, but it sounds reasonable. Still, it would be better not to have
to make this an either/or decision somehow.
--
Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-11-18 2:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-11-16 18:14 [PATCH] Don't hang user processes if Kerberos ticket for nfs4 mount expires John Hughes
2011-11-16 19:47 ` Jeff Layton
2011-11-16 23:44 ` Jim Rees
2011-11-17 1:31 ` Jeff Layton
2011-11-17 1:38 ` Jeff Layton
2011-11-17 11:05 ` John Hughes
2011-11-17 13:13 ` John Hughes
2011-11-17 21:46 ` Jeff Layton
2011-11-18 1:51 ` Jim Rees
2011-11-18 2:03 ` Jeff Layton [this message]
[not found] ` <4EC62325.1060009@Calva.COM>
2011-11-18 12:50 ` Jim Rees
2011-11-17 1:46 ` Matt W. Benjamin
2011-11-17 9:37 ` John Hughes
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2011-11-18 17:16 Myklebust, Trond
2011-11-18 17:54 ` Jim Rees
2011-11-18 18:23 ` Trond Myklebust
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20111117210308.4c5156fd@corrin.poochiereds.net \
--to=jlayton@redhat.com \
--cc=john@Calva.COM \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rees@umich.edu \
--cc=trond.myklebust@netapp.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox