Samba vs NFS

[Ow Mun Heng]

On Fri, 2004-05-28 at 07:04, Anthony J Placilla wrote:
> 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.

Thanks for the tip. Will look into it.