About zfs + nfs stability

Rick Macklem rmacklem at uoguelph.ca
Tue Aug 31 15:28:48 UTC 2010

> The freezes are gone, thankfully, but I often get huge slow-downs:
> looking in the logs of the nfs clients I get plenty of:
> ... kernel: nfs server ...:/path/to/dir: lockd not responding
> ... kernel: nfs server ...:/path/to/dir: lockd is alive again

If you don't need file locking to work across multiple clients
concurrently (ie. multiple clients aren't locking the same file
at the same time), then you can avoid the NLM by using the
"nolockd" mount option on the clients. (Linux has a similar
mount option under a different name.)

> I don't know if this has anything to do with zfs.

I don't believe it has anything to do with zfs. The NLM is a
separate protocol from NFS.

> 3) Is it a good idea to switch to nfsv4? Performance? Stability?

NFSv4 will provide better file locking (if you need that) imho, but
is still considered experimental, so it is hard to say how well
it will work for you. Some seem to use it without difficulties, whereas
others have problems. There is a recent unresolved thread where a
guy has perf. problems on some of his clients, but not all.


More information about the freebsd-stable mailing list