Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.user > #186280
| From | David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.debian.user |
| Subject | Re: Btrs vs ext4. Which one is more reliable? |
| Date | 2017-09-01 18:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ukWwp-759-5@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | (5 earlier) <udkvU-5mU-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <udkYV-5NJ-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <udlLj-6j5-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <ukJfR-5hS-31@gated-at.bofh.it> <ukSsO-3FA-19@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Fri 01 Sep 2017 at 08:34:25 (-0300), Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > On Thu, 31 Aug 2017, David Wright wrote: > > "RPC portmapper replacement" needs to be shut down cleanly however > > long it takes. Likewise the "Color Profiles" manager which, while > > Because if it didn't exit, it most likely means an NFS partition is > still unmounting and you could incur data loss if killing RPC causes > that NFS partition to "hang". I don't know why systemd would think that I had NFS partitions. I haven't run a server since 2004, and have never used a linux NFS client, only DOS6.22 ones. > > having a 90 second timeout to start with, would increment the timeout > > by another 90 seconds each time it expired, so it was effectively > > infinite. > > Now, that's just your usual bug, I think. I couldn't find any mention of timeouts increasing on their own, either in BTS under systemd or googling. Even now, I only see wishlists for making such timeouts interruptible with ^C. Cheers, David.
Back to linux.debian.user | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: Btrs vs ext4. Which one is more reliable? David Niklas <doark@mail.com> - 2017-08-10 06:10 +0200
Re: Btrs vs ext4. Which one is more reliable? Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2017-08-10 13:10 +0200
Re: Btrs vs ext4. Which one is more reliable? David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-08-10 15:50 +0200
Re: Btrs vs ext4. Which one is more reliable? Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2017-08-10 16:10 +0200
Re: Btrs vs ext4. Which one is more reliable? Dejan Jocic <jodejka@gmail.com> - 2017-08-10 16:10 +0200
Re: Btrs vs ext4. Which one is more reliable? Christian Seiler <christian@iwakd.de> - 2017-08-11 18:00 +0200
Re: Btrs vs ext4. Which one is more reliable? Dejan Jocic <jodejka@gmail.com> - 2017-08-11 18:30 +0200
Re: Btrs vs ext4. Which one is more reliable? Christian Seiler <christian@iwakd.de> - 2017-08-11 19:20 +0200
Re: Btrs vs ext4. Which one is more reliable? David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-09-01 03:50 +0200
Re: Btrs vs ext4. Which one is more reliable? Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@debian.org> - 2017-09-01 13:40 +0200
Re: Btrs vs ext4. Which one is more reliable? David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-09-01 18:00 +0200
Re: Btrs vs ext4. Which one is more reliable? Gary Dale <garydale@torfree.net> - 2017-08-11 17:00 +0200
Re: Btrs vs ext4. Which one is more reliable? Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net> - 2017-08-12 05:10 +0200
Re: Btrs vs ext4. Which one is more reliable? Zenaan Harkness <zenaan@freedbms.net> - 2017-08-12 09:00 +0200
Re: Btrs vs ext4. Which one is more reliable? rhkramer@gmail.com - 2017-08-12 15:20 +0200
csiph-web