RE: [PATCH] NFSv4: Use exponential backoff delay for Ni

[Myklebust, Trond]

It's legal, but dumb...

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Matt W. Benjamin [mailto:matt@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2013 11:28 AM
> To: Myklebust, Trond
> Cc: David Wysochanski; Dave Chiluk; linux-nfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-
> kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; bfields@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] NFSv4: Use exponential backoff delay for Ni
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Just to clarify, the IBM delay behavior is not legal?
> 
> Matt
> 
> ----- "Trond Myklebust" <Trond.Myklebust@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> >
> > OK, then. Now all I need is actual motivation for changing the
> > existing code other than handwaving arguments about "polling is better
> > than flat waits".
> > What actual use cases are impacting us now, other than the AIX design
> > decision to force CLOSE to retry at least once before succeeding?
> >
> 
> 
> --
> Matt Benjamin
> The Linux Box
> 206 South Fifth Ave. Suite 150
> Ann Arbor, MI  48104
> 
> http://linuxbox.com
> 
> tel.  734-761-4689
> fax.  734-769-8938
> cel.  734-216-5309
N‹§²æìr¸›yúèšØb²X¬¶ÇvØ^–)Þ{.nÇ+‰·¥Š{±‘êçzX§¶›¡Ü}©ž²ÆzÚ&j:+v‰¨¾«‘êçzZ+€Ê+zf£¢·hšˆ§~†­†Ûiÿûàz¹®w¥¢¸?™¨è­Ú&¢)ßf”ù^jÇy§m…á@A«a¶Úÿ0¶ìh®å’i