Hi,

 

can unRAID manage NFS protocol and if yes how ?

 

Thanks.

I just confirmed that the kernel in 4.1 does not have the NFS module built in.

 

So I believe the answer is "no" right now .

 

nfsd[4198]: nfssvc: Function not implimented

That's right, NFS is not currently built in.  It's on the future feature list, though & we'll look at adding this after 4.2 release.

Ok, thanks for answer.

 

An idea of date or a period when NFS will be implemented ?

Tom,

 

Any chance we could get the NFS module built into the kernel for the next release?

 

I understand it would not be "Supported", but it would give those of us having problems with Samba a way to work around it should 3.0.25b not resolve the issue. 

Sure we'll build NFS kernel support in the next release and make sure the other executables are there, eg, port mapper.  Integrated NFS support will have to wait until after 4.2.

That's perfect, thanks man!

What's the difference between NFS kernel support and integrated NFS support ?

 

Thanks

I believe Tom is talking about managing NFS via the unRAID Web UI when he refers to Integration.

 

Kernel support will let people manually start it up via the unix shell.

Ok thanks 

that's very good news indeed.

 

That truely is good news. My Unraid server has only one task: Serving HD movies. I'm planning to buy an external media player box soon (Tvix 5100 or limHD200i). But all those media player boxes don't cope well with Samba. They can't play HD movies over Samba fluidly. They all work much better with NFS. So NFS support is a really very important feature for me.

Yes it's a important feature for me also because i can't play simple DVD movies over Samba fludly, there are always jerks and my Tvix 5000-U can manage NFS protocol.

 

An idea of the period (1 month but 6 gold 1 year ?) for this feature ?

 

 

If Tom gets the next version out next week, I'm sure that one of us will have a post on the software forum for how to modify the go script to get some level of NFS going nearly right away.

 

For full Integration going forward, that could be a bit.  I think Security in the UI comes first, and that's going to make NFS in the UI more complicated...

If Tom gets the next version out next week, I'm sure that one of us will have a post on the software forum for how to modify the go script to get some level of NFS going nearly right away.

 

For full Integration going forward, that could be a bit.  I think Security in the UI comes first, and that's going to make NFS in the UI more complicated...

 

Another vote for NFS here   I also have a TiVX and NFS support would remove the need to run software on a Windows PC.  For those of us with more than 1 UnRaid box this is a BIG plus.

 

Thanks,

 

Mark.

Is there any way we can implement NFS software ourselves BTW?  or does it have to be present in the Kernel?

 

Thanks,

 

Mark.

The Kernel has to have support built in.  I've installed the packages and there is no way around that requirement.  This is actually a good thing, as it is how NFS preforms so well and has quality security.  Perhaps not as uber as Samba in what it can do, but the intigration is much better from a security aspect (ie: it just works, Samba is better over all..but can be complex).

 

Tom commited to having NFS support in the next release kernel and the applications to enable it in the image.  We just will not have support for running/configuring it from the GUI interface...so we will have to muck with the go script, or go into the actual image to get NFS working across reboots.

 

I know he was hoping to get the next relese out last week, I've not seen any updates on this in a while...so it could be any time now.

You don't have to give up the simplicity of Samba shares to get NFS security and speed.  There are utilities for Windows that will let you map a drive letter to an NFS mount on a linux box. 

Tom commited to having NFS support in the next release kernel and the applications to enable it in the image.

That's great news!

 

We just will not have support for running/configuring it from the GUI interface...so we will have to muck with the go script, or go into the actual image to get NFS working across reboots.

Not so good for us less technically minded at scripting.  Main problem comes after every update.

 

I was thinking, when I customised my Tivo years ago the main script called a custom script that contained my FTP & HTTP Server launches.  That way whenever I made a change to my personal script nothing had to be changed in the main startup sequence.

 

I'm not sure if this makes sense, but I know what I mean.

 

If Tom implemented a "run user_custom_script" feature in the "go" startup script then our modifications would remain even after version updates wouldn't they?

 

You don't have to give up the simplicity of Samba shares to get NFS security and speed.  There are utilities for Windows that will let you map a drive letter to an NFS mount on a linux box.

 

This is what I do at the moment, however I'm trying to get to a situation where I don't have to leave a PC running to stream from my UnRaids.  In my case the TVix netshare software only allows 1 TVIx box per PC running the appliction so I would need to leave 2 PCs on to access 2 UnRaids via NFS.

 

Thanks,

 

Mark.

 

You don't have to give up the simplicity of Samba shares to get NFS security and speed.  There are utilities for Windows that will let you map a drive letter to an NFS mount on a linux box. 

 

Interesting statement.  Early on we experimented a bit with NFS and found no speed advantage, just more nuisance on the Windows side dealing with a nfs client.  Also, as far as I know NFS is less secure since there's no connection-time authentication.

 

So I'm not too sure why the desire for NFS server?  Nevertheless, we will put in the 4.2-beta release.

You don't have to give up the simplicity of Samba shares to get NFS security and speed.  There are utilities for Windows that will let you map a drive letter to an NFS mount on a linux box. 

 

Interesting statement.  Early on we experimented a bit with NFS and found no speed advantage, just more nuisance on the Windows side dealing with a nfs client.  Also, as far as I know NFS is less secure since there's no connection-time authentication.

 

So I'm not too sure why the desire for NFS server?  Nevertheless, we will put in the 4.2-beta release.

 

If samba worked better for me that's be great, but it appears several of the stand alone media players don't handle samba too well.  TVix for example stutters over a samba connection, but when running an NFS app (TVIX Netshare) all is fine.  The thinking is that NFS directly on the UnRaid will mean we won't have to leave a PC on 24/7 running the server software.

 

I'm certainly looking forward to trying 4.2beta when it is available, do you know if the r1000 driver will be re-included?  I can only use 4.1 on 1 of my servers due to driver incompatibility http://lime-technology.com/forum/index.php?topic=921.0.

 

Thanks,

 

Mark.

The realtec drivers are a p.i.t.a.    The last time I tried building it got compile errors    I'll have to look to see of someone fixed this.

The realtec drivers are a p.i.t.a.    The last time I tried building it got compile errors    I'll have to look to see of someone fixed this.

 

There's quite a few Asus mobos that use these drivers, including the P5LD2 I use. the driver in 4.0 worked just fine.

http://www.asus.com/products4.aspx?l1=3&l2=11&l3=185&model=1022&modelmenu=1

 

Should I be buying GigLan PCI NIC cards for my servers?

 

Mark.

 

EDIT:- Typo corrected!

Right, the "r1000" driver worked fine under unRaid release 4.0, which used the linux 2.6.20 kernel.  But in unRaid release 4.1 we upgraded to the linux 2.6.22.1 kernel in order to pick up some SATA-related bug fixes.  Unfortunately, the 'r1000' driver would not compile without error against the linux 2.6.22.1 kernel source tree, hence we reverted back to the "other" realtec driver.  We're about to release 4.2-beta1, so I'll look again to see if the 'r1000' driver has been fixed for the newer linux kernel. 

 

BTW: linux 2.6.23 is about to be released, which has a gazilliion more changes 

Well, for some of us SAMBA is not functioning properly with Vista.  If Samba worked properly I'd much rather use it for the intigration in windows...however, NFS is proven and much less M$iffied .

 

It would be good to have as an option...even if it were without any security at all, just as Samba is today (export the disks only).  I don't think anyone is asking for a ton of time to be taken from SAMBA security (or any really, just the flag in the build and the binaries .  I think of NFS support as a work-around, perhaps a single checkbox on the UI to fire it up in a basic mode at some point....for now I'd be more then happy to drop some go-script lines to work around my issue...and would have already save for the compiled requirements in the kernel.

 

All of that said...any guess on 4.2-Beta?