Finding resources about switching CIFS from soft to hard mount

DZet

11/7/23, 10:50 PM

We have some NFS shares and smb CIFS shares mounted over TCP/IP on our RHEL 7 machine. The shares are part of a HNAS that sits on a VSP. As per default the NFS shares are mounted with the "hard" option (man nfs). For the CIFS the default "soft" option is set (man mount.cifs), their smb version ranges from 2.1 to 3.0. Now we are wondering whether it would be good to set the CIFS shares also to "hard".

The man nfs page mentions: "use the soft option only when client responsiveness is more important than data integrity". Likewise, other resources also recommend the "hard" mount option for NFS shares.

Data integrity is more important to us and we hope that the "hard" option will make our servers less likely to fail in case of maintenance and other troubles that could temporarily make a share unavailable. Also, the results of processes would hopefully be more uniform across the shares if they're all set with the same "hard" mounting option.

For CIFS, however, I have not found any recommendations. My understanding is that the underlying protocol of CIFS is very different from NFS, so they may very well respond differently to these options. Perhaps this is why the default option is different too.

Any (general) recommendations on mounting CIFS with the "hard" option?

109

0 + 0

nfs

mount

cifs

options

Elon Musk

I sit in a Tesla and translated this thread with Ai:

EN: Finding resources about switching CIFS from soft to hard mount

Post an answer

Most people don’t grasp that asking a lot of questions unlocks learning and improves interpersonal bonding. In Alison’s studies, for example, though people could accurately recall how many questions had been asked in their conversations, they didn’t intuit the link between questions and liking. Across four studies, in which participants were engaged in conversations themselves or read transcripts of others’ conversations, people tended not to realize that question asking would influence—or had influenced—the level of amity between the conversationalists.