--qGV0fN9tzfkG3CxV
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 01:36:48PM +0100, Hubert Feyrer wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Feb 2001, Ignatios Souvatzis wrote:
> > > Feb 14 02:23:15 rfhpc8133 /netbsd: nfs server rfhs8012:/home1: not re=
sponding
> > > Feb 14 02:23:16 rfhpc8133 /netbsd: nfs server rfhs8012:/home1: is ali=
ve again
> ...
> > Are you using NIS? In this case, configure a few slave servers.
>=20
> I do indeed use NIS. I wonder if master server and noe slave in the same
> subnet isn|t enough? I don't see this problem on any other machine...

My analysis, after talking to the people in neighbour departments
who had no such problem, is:

As Solaris NFS server is trying to validate each single access,=20
it depends on fast name and user etc. resolving (for us, netgroup
resolving is one of the culprits).

The Solaris NIS (not nis+, I don't know about that) server is definitely
too slow to serve a Solaris Ultra10 serving some 20 NFS clients.

Adding 2 slave servers solved the symptom for me. (One department was
running a couple of slave servers, the other had a SunOS4 machine as the
NIS master server.)

Regards,
	-is
--=20
 * Progress (n.): The process through which Usenet has evolved from
   smart people in front of dumb terminals to dumb people in front of
   smart terminals.  -- obs@burnout.demon.co.uk (obscurity)

--qGV0fN9tzfkG3CxV
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.i

iQEVAgUBOop9rDCn4om+4LhpAQHD2Qf9G6CFamAc1Mh+IS8AaXmCd+hlOb3vGU6B
DjgWPOFD7RLEgKqfdO3Oq6FUfEajJCc9PN9BjzbyjCETGkCLnw0LYU0jsrZ3mH/p
f5PA1Emkc+Lq87J1Ww19BKfbrlReyiSVw8+b1ik9Qx4uXZxC80N6bpq8mk+H0qQA
yfi7NbO4rVUGXHnCb29SwLonNrUZfLlJIi4xW9J8NlTvpfGLQ2jL3dh8WH1NGFlf
Wdf/ILDhOYIiOLH+WX0IobyGKjOK8rw0MQ37mNvSheDHS9WJ22lmoplXlW/OKljs
hR4NpqRjwd/bI8XGkA1NptucOpDR0GT7XCXpCz56Lq5Amh+VrCV8qA==
=aUr+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--qGV0fN9tzfkG3CxV--