From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BCBDF138334 for ; Sun, 18 Aug 2019 09:11:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 229C8E0AB9; Sun, 18 Aug 2019 09:11:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smarthost03c.mail.zen.net.uk (smarthost03c.mail.zen.net.uk [212.23.1.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9C6ADE0AAB for ; Sun, 18 Aug 2019 09:11:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [82.69.80.10] (helo=peak.localnet) by smarthost03c.mail.zen.net.uk with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1hzHDN-0004J8-2T for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Sun, 18 Aug 2019 09:11:05 +0000 From: Peter Humphrey To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] NFS setup Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2019 10:11:04 +0100 Message-ID: <3412835.6sJ7JlkKkD@peak> In-Reply-To: References: <3217537.KO732anV92@peak> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Originating-smarthost03c-IP: [82.69.80.10] Feedback-ID: 82.69.80.10 X-Archives-Salt: e815180e-2361-4365-a591-312941f7f3cf X-Archives-Hash: c1cdc1c6974d0c1fd43d82d0d8de65d5 On Sunday, 18 August 2019 09:30:36 BST Adam Carter wrote: > Is the output of 'mount | grep nfs' the same on the two client machines? $ mount | grep nfs nfsd on /proc/fs/nfsd type nfsd (rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime) It's the same on both clients. In the chroots, I see: atom / # mount | grep nfs 192.168.1.2:/usr/portage on /usr/portage type nfs (rw,relatime,vers=3,rsize=131072,wsize=131072,namlen=255,hard,proto=tcp,timeo=600,retrans=2,sec=sys,mountaddr=192.168.1.2,mountvers=3,mountport=32767,mountproto=udp,local_lock=none,addr=192.168.1.2) (That's the one that works right) clrn / # mount | grep nfs 192.168.1.4:/usr/portage on /usr/portage type nfs (rw,relatime,vers=3,rsize=1024,wsize=1024,namlen=255,hard,proto=tcp,timeo=600,retrans=2,sec=sys,mountaddr=192.168.1.4,mountvers=3,mountport=32767,mountproto=udp,local_lock=none,addr=192.168.1.4) The only differences I can see are the IP addresses (of course) and the rsize and wsize; the good one has 128K, the other 1K. I'd better look into that, though it doesn't look like the problem. The good client is a 32-bit single- core Atom, the other is a 64-bit quad-core Celeron. /etc/conf.d/nfs is the same on both clients: OPTS_RPC_NFSD="1" OPTS_RPC_MOUNTD="-p 32767" OPTS_RPC_STATD="-p 32765 -o 32766" OPTS_RPC_IDMAPD="" OPTS_RPC_GSSD="" OPTS_RPC_SVCGSSD="" OPTS_RPC_RQUOTAD="" EXPORTFS_TIMEOUT=30 Any other ideas? -- Regards, Peter.