[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Long delays caused by rpcinfo



Hello,

I recently set up a VM running Debian Wheezy (amd64) to be used as an NFS server.  I noticed that running "/etc/init.d/nfs-kernel-server start" would hang for about 60 seconds while starting nfsd, but if I started nfsd directly, there was no problem.  After a lot of strace adventures and Google searches, I eventually traced the problem to the "rpcinfo" command.  I commented out the following lines from the nfs-kernel-server init script, everything started working:

    $PREFIX/bin/rpcinfo -u localhost nfs 3 >/dev/null 2>&1 ||
        RPCMOUNTDOPTS="$RPCMOUNTDOPTS --no-nfs-version 3"

Indeed, running "rpcinfo -u localhost nfs 3" causes a long pause before it finally outputs the following:

    rpcinfo: RPC: Port mapper failure - Timed out
    program 100003 version 3 is not available

Running "rpcinfo -p localhost" causes the same long pause, and then outputs this:

    rpcinfo: can't contact portmapper: RPC: Remote system error - Connection timed out

Running "showmount --exports" results in the long pause, and then outputs this:

    clnt_create: RPC: Port mapper failure - Timed out

However, running "rpcinfo -p" without specifying the host returns immediately:

    program vers proto   port  service
     100000    4   tcp    111  portmapper
     100000    3   tcp    111  portmapper
     100000    2   tcp    111  portmapper
     100000    4   udp    111  portmapper
     100000    3   udp    111  portmapper
     100000    2   udp    111  portmapper
     100024    1   udp  42629  status
     100024    1   tcp  56434  status

I have confirmed that rpc.statd is running, which I believe is the port mapper in newer distributions.

Any idea why I would be seeing this behavior?  Is there a configuration option I'm missing?  Any help would be greatly appreciated.

    Thanks!
    Dave

--
Dave Parker
Systems Administrator
Utica College
Integrated Information Technology Services
(315) 792-3229
Registered Linux User #408177

Reply to: