samba or nfs?

samba or nfs?

[Luca Ferrari]

Hi,
in my factory we are sharing resources (files) among different linux servers, 
even located in another site (i.e., using an adsl connection). Which do you 
believe is the better sharing protocol (NFS/SAMBA) to mount server resources? 
Actually we are using samba, due also to the fact that the line speed was not 
very high and NFS seemed to have a few problem with the speed. Now that the 
speed is higher, but the line has a few moment of freeze, samba seems to be 
inadequate. Any opinion?

Thanks,
Luca
-- 
Luca Ferrari,
fluca1978@katamail.com

Re: samba or nfs?

[Martin Klier]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1166 bytes --]

Hi Luca,

Luca Ferrari:
> Hi,
> in my factory we are sharing resources (files) among different linux
> servers, even located in another site (i.e., using an adsl connection).
> Which do you believe is the better sharing protocol (NFS/SAMBA) to mount
> server resources? Actually we are using samba, due also to the fact that
> the line speed was not very high and NFS seemed to have a few problem with
> the speed. Now that the speed is higher, but the line has a few moment of
> freeze, samba seems to be inadequate. Any opinion?
>
> Thanks,
> Luca
I'd always prefer NFS due to native support of Linux and the little config 
effort. But NFS might be critical in case of security issues, it has no 
valuable security features. 

But before you posted your query, I'd have always said that SAMBA is the 
slower option. How did you recognize the NFS problems? Just for interest...

Have fun,

-- 
Mit freundlichen Grüßen

Martin Klier
PC-Benutzerunterstützung / Linux-Server
Asset Management

A.T.U - Auto-Teile-Unger
Dr.-Kilian-Straße 11
92637 Weiden

Telefon:  (0961) 306-5663
Telefax:  (0961) 306-9345663

Internet: www.atu.de

[-- Attachment #2: signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: samba or nfs?

[urgrue]

i use samba. it may have more overhead and be a bit more annoying to 
set up, but NFS has been quite troublesome for me, particularly when 
the connection speeds were slowish or unstable. quite often i'd have 
these dead mounts that couldnt be unmounted by any means and only a 
reboot would help.
samba isnt exactly great either, but at least it seems to deal with 
network irregularities better.
openafs is a third option that people have recommended to me, which i 
have not yet tried.


On 2004.12.16 13:14, Luca Ferrari wrote:
> Hi,
> in my factory we are sharing resources (files) among different linux
> servers,
> even located in another site (i.e., using an adsl connection). Which
> do you
> believe is the better sharing protocol (NFS/SAMBA) to mount server
> resources?
> Actually we are using samba, due also to the fact that the line speed
> was not
> very high and NFS seemed to have a few problem with the speed. Now
> that the
> speed is higher, but the line has a few moment of freeze, samba seems
> to be
> inadequate. Any opinion?
> 
> Thanks,
> Luca
> --
> Luca Ferrari,
> fluca1978@katamail.com
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-
> admin"
> in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> 
>