From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sun May 20 08:10:06 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 051291065676 for ; Sun, 20 May 2012 08:10:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8F518FC08 for ; Sun, 20 May 2012 08:10:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q4K8A4oq087731 for ; Sun, 20 May 2012 08:10:04 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.5/8.14.5/Submit) id q4K8A4KP087730; Sun, 20 May 2012 08:10:04 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Sun, 20 May 2012 08:10:04 GMT Message-Id: <201205200810.q4K8A4KP087730@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org From: Martin Birgmeier Cc: Subject: Re: kern/136865: [nfs] [patch] NFS exports atomic and on-the-fly atomic updates X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Martin Birgmeier List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 20 May 2012 08:10:06 -0000 The following reply was made to PR kern/136865; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Martin Birgmeier To: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org, simon@comsys.ntu-kpi.kiev.ua Cc: Subject: Re: kern/136865: [nfs] [patch] NFS exports atomic and on-the-fly atomic updates Date: Sun, 20 May 2012 10:04:01 +0200 Dear Andrey, It seems that you have done some great work here, and I would really like to see this integrated into the core FreeBSD distribution (I was the submitter of http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/131342). I would like to try out your patches and have two questions: - Do your patches support multiple zfs sharenfs specifications as proposed in http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=147881 (I am using this)? - Could you give a concise list of incompatibilities (and even regressions if they should exist at all) of your solution compared to the standard one? - As to the advantages, I am already convinced. :-) Thank you & regards, Martin