[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 21:03:08 -0500
From: Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>
To: Jim Rees <rees@...ch.edu>
Cc: John Hughes <john@...va.COM>,
Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@...app.com>,
linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Don't hang user processes if Kerberos ticket for nfs4
mount expires
On Thu, 17 Nov 2011 20:51:16 -0500
Jim Rees <rees@...ch.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@...hat.com>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists