OK, noted, I will make that change.  Thanks for that Tim and Justin.

On 7/22/15 10:13 AM, Parisi, Justin wrote:

TR-4067 covers general mount best practices and “hard” is one of those best practices. ;)

 

On page 97:
http://www.netapp.com/us/media/tr-4067.pdf

 

hard or soft

hard or soft specifies whether the program using a file using NFS should stop and wait (hard) for the server to come back online if the NFS server is unavailable or if it should report an error (soft). If hard is specified, processes directed to an NFS mount that is unavailable cannot be terminated unless the intr option is also specified. If soft is specified, the timeo= option can be specified, where is the number of seconds before an error is reported.

 

For business-critical NFS exports, NetApp recommends using hard mounts. NetApp strongly discourages the use of soft mounts.

 

From: toasters-bounces@teaparty.net [mailto:toasters-bounces@teaparty.net] On Behalf Of tmac
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 10:10 AM
To: Roy McMorran
Cc: toasters@teaparty.net
Subject: Re: FAS-2554 cDOT sanity check requested

 

There is really no good reason to use "soft" when using RW.

Just asking, begging for data corruption.

 

I remember a post many years ago from Guy Harris (you know, one of the guys who actually help invent NFS!)

and it was basically this"

 

"Never ever ever ever ever ever use soft...."

 

I know there are case over a WAN where it might help, or maybe if you are using ReadOnly.

 

 

--tmac

 

Tim McCarthy

Principal Consultant