Article View: comp.mail.misc
Article #1030Re: Frequency of NFS lock problems w/ NFS mounted mail spool
From: Jim Ault
Date: Tue, 01 Sep 1992 20:01
Date: Tue, 01 Sep 1992 20:01
45 lines
3192 bytes
3192 bytes
In article <LINDA.92Sep1135545@matisse.uni-paderborn.de> linda@uni-paderborn.de (Linda Floren) writes: >>>>> Regarding Re: Frequency of NFS lock problems w/ NFS mounted mail spool; karl@ddsw1.mcs.com (Karl Denninger) adds: Karl> It is decidedly NOT a good idea to have more than one machine on an Karl> NFS-mounted mail spool writing >inbound< messages to a user's mailbox. Karl> The various rpc.lockd bugs will bite you if you try this, and Sun has one of Karl> the worst records in this area. The results are hung sendmail processes and Karl> mail that never gets delivered. We have a network of more than a hundred Sun4, which all mount the mail-directory read-write and do local mail-delivery without forwarding to the server ( it would most likely break down if they did), and we never had serious problems with this policy. We have over 350 client workstations (half Suns, half IBMs) mounting a single mail directory (from a Sun) read-write, and all of them forward mail to the server for local delivery. This machine is also used as a forwarding machine for mail that goes off campus. It has not broken down yet (but we have been seeing some high loads lately). We have definitely seen locking problems between IBM RS6000 NFS clients and our Sun4 NFS server. We have received patched rpc.lockd, and a new kernel with the NFS jumbo patch, but still we have been having problems with a user on an IBM NFS client typing "q" to get out of mail, and the process never returns. Killing and restarting rpc.lockd sometimes works to free up these processes that are waiting for locks from the server, but something only a fastboot of the server will fix it. It had been working fine for several months (the "q" bug had disappeared), so we are not sure why it has come up again now. I will say that we have doing this for several years (since 1987) with a network of Suns, and we never had this problem until we added IBM RS6000 NFS clients into the mix. It still has been a relatively stable mail architecture for quite a few machines. Now, however, in the face of such high loads, and the number of client workstations increasing, we are working on moving to a solution based on POP, which we hope will allow us to split the load across two or more server machines (you can't split one directory across two NFS servers easily). If you want more info, send me email. -- Jim Ault, ITS Systems Programmer, aultj@rpi.edu <><
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<AULTJ.92Sep1150109@caleb.rpi.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!gatech!rpi!usenet.rpi.edu!aultjReferences:
<1992Aug27.185938.21422@leland.Stanford.EDU> <1992Aug30.032843.8468@ddsw1.mcs.com> <LINDA.92Sep1135545@matisse.uni-paderborn.de>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc,comp.protocols.nfs,comp.mail.elm,comp.unix.admin,comp.sys.sun.admin,comp.unix.ultrix Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!gatech!rpi!usenet.rpi.edu!aultj From: aultj@rpi.edu (Jim Ault) Subject: Re: Frequency of NFS lock problems w/ NFS mounted mail spool In-Reply-To: linda@uni-paderborn.de's message of Tue, 1 Sep 1992 12:55:45 GMT Message-ID: <AULTJ.92Sep1150109@caleb.rpi.edu> Nntp-Posting-Host: caleb.its.rpi.edu Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute References: <1992Aug27.185938.21422@leland.Stanford.EDU> <1992Aug30.032843.8468@ddsw1.mcs.com> <LINDA.92Sep1135545@matisse.uni-paderborn.de> Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 20:01:09 GMT Lines: 45