[Nix-dev] [PATCH] NFSv4 support

[Lluís Batlle i Rossell]

On Sun, Jan 01, 2012 at 08:03:58PM +0100, Rickard Nilsson wrote:
> Den 2011-12-30 17:36:00 skrev Marc Weber <marco-oweber at gmx.de>:
> 
> >> Shouldn't we keep portmap? Maybe we can have an option choosing what rpc
> >> mechanism nixos should use. But I prefer keeping portmap.
> > Can those who know the difference write a brief summary about what the
> > change means and list some arguments for both ways?
> > Then it would be easier to judge.
> >
> > I will have a look at the ntfsv4 patch because I'm interested in it.
> > Don't have time right now.
> 
> I was under the impression that portmap didn't work with NFSv4, but I'm  
> not so sure anymore. rpcbind seems at least to have "more features", ipv6  
> support etc. It seems several distributions (Debian, ArchLinux) switched  
> out portmap for rpcbind when implementing proper support for NFSv4. I can  
> try to see how NFSv4 works out with portmap in Nixos. As long as it works,  
> I don't care which one is used. I'm a bit busy now, but I'll report back  
> when I have tried it out. Maybe I can implement a way to select which RPC  
> daemon that should be used.

That looks much better. :)

One year ago I think tried nfsv4. nixos was the client, an ubuntu (without
rpcbind) was the server). I think I only used the special notation in
/etc/exports to use it, and benchmarked it against nfsv3, seeing no difference.

In both computers, there was only portmap.