Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 27 Oct 2009 14:13:14 -0500
From:      "Larry Rosenman" <ler@lerctr.org>
To:        "'Arno J. Klaassen'" <arno@heho.snv.jussieu.fr>, <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>
Cc:        freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Subject:   RE: ZFS and 'traditional' nfs-export
Message-ID:  <00b301ca5739$8e9b3850$abd1a8f0$@org>
In-Reply-To: <wpbpjtwwg7.fsf@heho.snv.jussieu.fr>
References:  <wpbpjtwwg7.fsf@heho.snv.jussieu.fr>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
ZFS makes its own version of the exports file.

Just do it that way, and be safe.

You can pass the full set of NFS options in the sharenfs parameter....



--=20
Larry Rosenman                     http://www.lerctr.org/~ler
Phone: +1 512-248-2683                E-Mail: ler@lerctr.org
US Mail: 430 Valona Loop, Round Rock, TX 78681-3893


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org =
[mailto:owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org]
On Behalf Of Arno J. Klaassen
Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 6:46 PM
To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Subject: ZFS and 'traditional' nfs-export


Hello,

I googled a bit on this question but could not find
a clear answer :

is there any risk/inconvenience/advantage in exporting
a ZFS-fs by just putting it in /etc/exports the old
way and leaving the 'sharenfs' option on the filesystem off?

I'd like to replace a UFS-based server serving mostly
linux-clients which work well now with a ZFS-fs, and somehow
am a bit waterfearing changing the nfs=E8options which worked
great till now.

Thank you in advance,

regards, Arno
_______________________________________________
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?00b301ca5739$8e9b3850$abd1a8f0$>