Bob Kinney wrote:
(Sorry about the incomplete prior post--stupid yahoo mail) I thought that hard NFS mounts were a thing of the past--like the mid '90s. Isn't it preferred to set them up with an automounter to prevent panic when communication falters?
No in this case hard mounts are when file IO operations are essentially blocked if the mounted NFS filesystem does a vanishing trick. The idea being that when connectivity is returned, the pending operations continue and the process is none the wiser. Conversely soft mounts chuck back IO errors to the process which aren't always handled as gracefully as perhaps they should be. Sure automounter can reduce the chances of a stale or blocked NFS mount as the filesystem isn't always mounted but they can occur.
-- Ian Chapman.
