DerCarsten

Just radio silence. Well, at least I didn't find anything from their end in the forums, apart from challenging the advantages of NFS over SMB in 2014 and the note in 2016 that they were considering to implement it (see further up in this thread). When you search the community forums you find plenty of people with NFS problems. Stale file handles seem to be the most popular problem. I'm surprised the question was raised by Linux experts. When I struggled with V3 I tried to use SMB. I then tried to run Nextcloud with MySQL as the backend in docker containers on a dedicated server, to name just one of the use-cases. So, a !functional! network connection is must. It was a nightmare! Permission problems left right center ..... NFS was the only chance to get that running. And with V3? Permission problems were gone, but stale file handles within a few hours or, if I was lucky, a few days. With ganesha NFS V4 my stuff is now running for a year+ without having to touch it. Just perfect. Downside is, that ganesha is a workaround, not a solution. With MS Win clients SMB is ok. With MacOS SMB ist sort of ok, but dead slow when it comes to reading directories with a bigger number of entries. But that is a MacOS issue, not an Unraid issue. Nevertheless, NFS would be desirable. With Linux clients SMB won't work if you need permissions. In a world where you have to have control over your security settings, especially when you provide services outside of your local network (web servers etc.), you can't work with SMB. NFS is the only option here. V3 with stale file handlers all over the place is useless. A shame you have to explain that to Linux experts. Whatever, ....... frustrating though ...

@flinx01 Mit Stale File Handlers hatte ich auch immense Probleme. Ich habe dazu einen Workaround installiert. Nicht schön, funktioniert aber. Stale File Handlers treten damit nicht mehr auf. Hintergrund ist, daß Unraid NFSV3 implementiert hat und nicht V4. Mein Workaround ist ein NFSV4. Moderner und besser. Gruß

@ausca they lost the focus, paired with sheer ignorance. As simple as that. Unraid is not a NAS anymore. Have a look at that what's in the box and what is being worked on. Virtualization, Wireguard, GPU support, Docker stuff ... What has all of this to do with a NAS? It turns into an all-singing-all-dancing something. Fancy stuff is being implemented on the fly (seems to be), which then has to undergo troubleshooting, improvement and maintenance, with new ideas for these new features coming in, blowing things out of proportion and keep the team busy with non-core tasks. All of a sudden you find yourself in a situation, where you have a tool that can do loads of things which are (presumably) great. But, at the same time you neglect the basics, the roots of your product and what it initially wanted to be. NFSV4? Bonkers. -> GPU Support! That is what you need on your NAS! Forget NFS V4, a Windows VM is what you need on your NAS, man! I'm sure there are good use-cases for most of the features in Unraid, no question. But what about the NFS V4 use-case? Plenty of people in the community complaining about "stale file handles" and other problems with V3. I was fighting stale file handles for a year+ with tons and tons of hours of trying and testing, before I came across a docker version of ganesha-nfs. And all of a sudden all of the problems I had with NFS were gone, ALL! As long as you have a high tech SatNav in your car, Voice Control, autonomous driving, aircon, surround sound ... who cares about your flat tyre? Just balance your car properly and enjoy the music! Who needs four wheels? I have my rant about this topic occasionally here and I'm sure that this won't encourage anybody of the team to implement something. I know that. On the other hand I'm really annoyed about limetech's ignorance. If they were communicating at least some reasons, good or bad ones, why they refuse to implement it, one could understand or discuss things or even support. But this complete ignorance is the worst a company can do to customers. Regards

@PeterB there is a work-around with a ganesha-nfs container. I described the installation in another post, which I referred to in my post above. Regards Carsten

Any luck with Ganesha-NFS?

Yes, rebooting the proxy sounds very familiar Did you check the proxy logs? In my case the reason for the failures were stale file handles. With Ganesha-NFS I've never seen a stale handle. It is really annoying to run a NAS with an outdated NFS V3. Plenty of bells and whistles in Unraid, but the lack of a very basic function of a NAS makes me speechless. It is a NAS in the end. Anything else is a nice-to-have. Ok, I'll stop my rant now. It's all said ... 😞

Not having NFS4 is a real nuisance. There are valid reasons which have been outlined in numerous threads. I installed a workaround which is ok for the time being, but it is a) 3rd party b) still under development c) requires resources, which would be more useful in other places d) requires extra maintenance e) has its own (strange) behavior, which needs to be managed f) requires stupid exceptions in the setup of the infrastructure the Unraid NAS is operated in All of the above is superfluous and could be avoided. The posts quoted in the original post show, that it had been "sort of" considered at some point in 2016, but not followed up any further. Even worse, despite the numerous requests from the community (it goes back to 2011) this topic seems to be completely ignored by limetech. No comments, no answers, no roadmap, no proposals for alternative setups/configurations, nothing. Complete ignorance for years, apart from the single comment in 2016. This is not the way to deal with customers and not the way to attract new customers. My apologies to the developers for my harsh comments, but you've been working yourselves towards this sort of reaction. Regards

By the looks of it, NFS V4 is not implemented, yet. See my work-around.