Linux - Software This forum is for Software issues.
Having a problem installing a new program? Want to know which application is best for the job? Post your question in this forum. |
Notices |
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
Are you new to LinuxQuestions.org? Visit the following links:
Site Howto |
Site FAQ |
Sitemap |
Register Now
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
|
 |
12-31-2008, 08:57 AM
|
#1
|
Member
Registered: Jun 2005
Distribution: arch, ubuntu
Posts: 456
Rep:
|
nautilus or thunar freeze when nfs mount not available
Hey all,
I am having a problem with some of my file system mounts.
Here is what happens.
i have a main computer with a folder /mnt/shared
in my exports file i give everyone on the LAN permission to read, etc..
on the client computers, i have the line in fstab that looks like
Code:
192.168.1.2:/mnt/shared /mnt/shared nfs defaults 0 0
it all works fine, however, if the main computer is shut off, the client computers have thunar or nautilus (whichever they use) will hang untill either a restart or remount of the share.
What can i do to the client computers that will make them just go on with life if the 192.168.1.2 computer is not available?
thanks
|
|
|
12-31-2008, 10:42 AM
|
#2
|
Senior Member
Registered: Aug 2007
Location: South Carolina, U.S.A.
Distribution: Ubuntu, Fedora Core, Red Hat, SUSE, Gentoo, DSL, coLinux, uClinux
Posts: 1,302
Rep: 
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by nephish
What can i do to the client computers that will make them just go on with life if the 192.168.1.2 computer is not available?
|
Write a shell script that pings the 192.168.1.2 once per second. If it does not respond, unmount the NFS share. If it does respond, re-mount the share.
|
|
|
12-31-2008, 11:42 AM
|
#3
|
Member
Registered: Jun 2005
Distribution: arch, ubuntu
Posts: 456
Original Poster
Rep:
|
sounds like a good plan, thanks
|
|
|
12-31-2008, 12:07 PM
|
#4
|
Gentoo support team
Registered: May 2008
Location: Lucena, Córdoba (Spain)
Distribution: Gentoo
Posts: 4,083
|
David1357, that can cause some problems in unreliable connections. Note that unmounting an NFS volume can hang for a long time (minutes) if the volume is not reachable. In my experience, these problems arise even if you mount it with async,soft,intr.
nephish, this is a known problem with NFS. I would also be interested in an alternative. Seeing how linux has a network architecture tightly tied into its roots it's hard to believe that NFS is such an horrid thing. Personally I use it only when strictly necessary. Most times I preffer sshfs over it, but some times it's not suitable for the task.
ps. Everything I said here is applicable to v3. I never tried NFS v4.
|
|
|
12-31-2008, 12:35 PM
|
#5
|
Senior Member
Registered: Aug 2007
Location: South Carolina, U.S.A.
Distribution: Ubuntu, Fedora Core, Red Hat, SUSE, Gentoo, DSL, coLinux, uClinux
Posts: 1,302
Rep: 
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by i92guboj
David1357, that can cause some problems in unreliable connections.
|
If the connection is so unreliable that ICMP cannot get around, then it is unlikely that NFS is going to be working.
|
|
|
12-31-2008, 03:25 PM
|
#6
|
Member
Registered: Jun 2005
Distribution: arch, ubuntu
Posts: 456
Original Poster
Rep:
|
well, i had wanted to use nfs and the prior suggestion, just not doing it every second, maybe 1/minute. And yeah, it is because of the somewhat flakyness.
I have been using samba, which i like bacause my mac can see it, but still would much rather use something that should be very ingrained into the linux world. I am wanting to write a pet project program that involves an almost virtual, psudo filesystem using existing technologies.
Thanks for the tips, and yes, if i find a better answer, i will post it here.
|
|
|
12-31-2008, 04:13 PM
|
#7
|
Senior Member
Registered: Aug 2007
Location: South Carolina, U.S.A.
Distribution: Ubuntu, Fedora Core, Red Hat, SUSE, Gentoo, DSL, coLinux, uClinux
Posts: 1,302
Rep: 
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by nephish
I have been using samba, which i like because my mac can see it, but still would much rather use something that should be very ingrained into the linux world.
|
If it is any consolation, I think most people end up using samba because it can be accessed by non-Linux operating systems. I have been using samba to share files on Linux machines since 2002 and I have never had any problems.
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:28 AM.
|
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
|
Latest Threads
LQ News
|
|