Jump to content

Should I use NFS in lieu of Samba on all Linux network?


Rizlaw

Recommended Posts

unRAID 6.0.0 runs Linux as do all my other computers. I do have Win7 as a VMware virtual machine, but I don't use it to access my unRAID 6 server. Beyond my all Linux system, another reason for considering NFS is that many of the large files I have use special characters that are forbidden in Windows (for example, the colon : ).  When I try to copy files from my Ubuntu workstation to unRAID 6 with the SAMBA protocol, I always get a file copy error regarding any filename with a colon. I don't feel like finding and renaming hundreds of files; although on all new files I am using "-" in lieu of ":".

 

I've done a search on the unRAID Version 6 support forum and the online manual for version 6 and I don't seem to find an anwer to these questions:

 

1. Is the NFS filesystem under unRAID 6 stable enough to use (any other downsides to NFS)?

 

2. Would using the NFS filesystem result in faster transfers than using SAMBA? Currently, I'm seeing about 45-50 MB/s file transfer speeds via SAMBA directly to unRAID6 disk shares. I also see the same speeds when copying to unRAID 6 cache drives ( I thought copying to cache would be faster because of the lack of parity writing, but it's not the case).

 

3. Can NFS and SAMBA co-exist? If so, are the shares displayed differently to me on my local Linux workstation; in other words, how would I know the difference between doing a SAMBA transfer and an NFS transfer?

 

4. Besides enabling NTF in "Network Services" are there any other settings I need to enable in unRAID 6 or on my Ubuntu 14.04LTS workstations to make this all work properly? What are they?

 

Thanks for any help.

 

 

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...