<font size=2 face="sans-serif">Hi All,</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> I'm
not sure if this will help anyone, but I found nfs unstable on my box at
home (which runs a number of nfs root'd servers as well as mythtv storage),
I resolved the issue by setting the clients to tcp and also increasing
the block size. I now use the following mount options:</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">
defaults,tcp,rsize=8192,wsize=8192 for general
servers.</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">
defaults,tcp,rsize=8192,wsize=8192,actimeo=0
for mythtv.</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> I
should point out I found the above 'fix' was born out of a bit of guess
work and assumption around what was causing my issues. I'm also running
16 nfsd's (although I don't recall this was required to fix my stability
issues)</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Hope this helps (disregard if a load
of rubbish!)</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Alex</font>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br><tt><font size=2>mythtv-users-bounces@mythtv.org wrote on 09/05/2009
05:59:57:<br>
<br>
> From:</font></tt>
<br><tt><font size=2>> <br>
> Nasa <nasa01@comcast.net></font></tt>
<br><tt><font size=2>> <br>
> To:</font></tt>
<br><tt><font size=2>> <br>
> Discussion about mythtv <mythtv-users@mythtv.org></font></tt>
<br><tt><font size=2>> <br>
> Date:</font></tt>
<br><tt><font size=2>> <br>
> 09/05/2009 05:06</font></tt>
<br><tt><font size=2>> <br>
> Subject:</font></tt>
<br><tt><font size=2>> <br>
> Re: [mythtv-users] mythtv + nfs = bad?</font></tt>
<br><tt><font size=2>> <br>
> Sent by:</font></tt>
<br><tt><font size=2>> <br>
> mythtv-users-bounces@mythtv.org</font></tt>
<br><tt><font size=2>> <br>
> <br>
> ----- "Dale Pontius" <DEPontius@edgehp.net> wrote:<br>
> <br>
> > Brian Wood wrote:<br>
> > > On Thursday 07 May 2009 07:43:38 James Oltman wrote:<br>
> > >> On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 6:55 PM, Brian Wood <beww@beww.org>
wrote:<br>
> > >>> What version of NFS?<br>
> > >>><br>
> > >>> I think NFS v.2 (client side) has a 2GB file size
limit, which<br>
> > means it<br>
> > >>> can only look at the first 2GB of a file that's
larger than 2GB.<br>
> > >>><br>
> > >>> Version 3 supports larger files, but obviously it
depends on the<br>
> > >>> filesystem on<br>
> > >>> the server side, if it were FAT, for example, a
4.7GB file would<br>
> > be a<br>
> > >>> problem.<br>
> > >>><br>
> > >>> There is also a limit on the size of a transfer
"on the wire",<br>
> > which<br>
> > >>> depends<br>
> > >>> on whether TCP or UDP is used, and the particular
implementation.<br>
> > >>><br>
> > >>> Large files and NFS can be problematical, make sure
you understand<br>
> > any<br>
> > >>> limits<br>
> > >>> of your server and client NFS versions, as well
as the filesystem<br>
> > in use.<br>
> > >>><br>
> > >>> Google "nfs file size limits" for more
information.<br>
> > >> Brian,<br>
> > >><br>
> > >> Thanks for the response. What was strange about
my setup was that<br>
> > it was<br>
> > >> working just fine for a long time. Then all of
the sudden, one<br>
> > day, it<br>
> > >> stopped working. I don't know if it happened during
a kernel<br>
> > update or<br>
> > >> what. I know I'm running NFSv2. I don't
know how to update myself<br>
> > to v3<br>
> > >> or above.<br>
> > > <br>
> > > <br>
> > > The precise upgrade method would depend on your distribution,
any of<br>
> > the most <br>
> > > recent distros should have support for v3. I'd consult the
relevant<br>
> > support <br>
> > > fori.<br>
> > > <br>
> > > Even if (for example) an upgrade to your server side machine
enabled<br>
> > nfs v3, <br>
> > > the systems should negotiate the highest commonly supported
version,<br>
> > so if <br>
> > > your client can only do v2, that's what the server should
do as<br>
> > well.<br>
> > > <br>
> > > There have also been some changes in the default settings
for<br>
> > sync/async, and <br>
> > > some others I think.<br>
> > > <br>
> > > But using "mixed" systems might cause problems.<br>
> > > <br>
> > > Another user here noted an improvement in performance by
using samba<br>
> > mounts <br>
> > > instead of NFS, certainly sounds like it's worth a try.
I'm going to<br>
> > look <br>
> > > into that, and try to get some hard numbers.<br>
> > > <br>
> > > I'm certainly no expert on NFS, I use it for non-Myth applications<br>
> > and it has <br>
> > > always "just worked", but I don't put much demand
on it. <br>
> > > <br>
> > I'm running nfs4 and still have the problems. It's supposed
to be <br>
> > ironed out by the time client and server get to 2.6.29 or beyond.<br>
> > <br>
> This discussion got me to do some googling.... I came across
some <br>
> discussion, such as here:<br>
> <br>
> </font></tt><a href=http://www.ncsa.uiuc.edu/UserInfo/Resources/Hardware/IBMp690/IBM/><tt><font size=2>http://www.ncsa.uiuc.edu/UserInfo/Resources/Hardware/IBMp690/IBM/</font></tt></a><tt><font size=2><br>
> usr/share/man/info/en_US/a_doc_lib/aixbman/prftungd/2365ca3.htm<br>
> <br>
> which eventually led me to see this...<br>
> <br>
> </font></tt><a href="http://kamilkisiel.blogspot.com/2007/11/understanding-linux-nfsd-"><tt><font size=2>http://kamilkisiel.blogspot.com/2007/11/understanding-linux-nfsd-</font></tt></a><tt><font size=2><br>
> statistics.html<br>
> <br>
> Those combined with some more research led me to believe I wasn't
<br>
> running enough nfsd daemons. The default of 8 just isn't good
<br>
> enough -- does that account for the<br>
> problem I was seeing, I guess time will tell. But it's at least
a start.<br>
> <br>
> Nasa<br>
> <br>
> <br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> mythtv-users mailing list<br>
> mythtv-users@mythtv.org<br>
> </font></tt><a href="http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users"><tt><font size=2>http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users</font></tt></a><tt><font size=2><br>
</font></tt>