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

Re: Samba vs NFS



On Mon, 2004-05-24 at 16:53, Craig White wrote:
> On Fri, 2004-05-21 at 18:12, Ow Mun Heng wrote:
> > Hi Guys,
> > 
> > 	I have a problem. I want to access a shared directory over a WAN link.
> > 
> > There are 2 methods available to me, NFS and Samba.
> > 
> > Problem is the Client is a Linux Box, and somehow the idea of using
> > samba as a means to an end instead of NFS is a little bit weird (?).
> > 
> > But anyway, I tried both and it seems that I have more success using
> > samba to mount the share rather than using NFS.
> > 
> > NFS always reports a time-out connecting the server. Yes, there is a
> > 200ms lag in ping times to the server box (WAN link)
> > 
> > However, Samba seems to be able to handle it more gracefully than NFS.
> > 
> > Ideas?? Comments??
> ----
> samba/SMB uses UDP whereas NFS uses TCP - hence the issues of speed vs.
> reliability. You could probably google the idea of using UDP instead of
> TCP on NFS connections but myself, I would opt for reliability.
> 
> Craig

also

have you tried tweaking the timeo=# & retrans=# values in fstab for the
mount?

More gory details available at:
http://unixhelp.ed.ac.uk/CGI/man-cgi?nfs+5


-- 
Tony Placilla, RHCT
anthony_placilla suth com


perl -e 'print $i=pack(c5, (41*2), sqrt(7056), (unpack(c,H)-2), oct(115), 10);'



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