D&C GLug - Home Page

[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]

Re: [LUG] Cloud Storage

 

Just on NFS which I posted about a while back. 
I got spectacular NFSv4 results 4x performance of SMB in a corporate environment 
with Netapp. 
The tricky bit for me is mapping permissions, still getting my head around UID 
mapping. 
So more recent NFS version, with 10.9/10.8 clients has been really good. 

Regards

Matt


On 7 Apr 2014, at 12:32, bad apple wrote:

> On 07/04/14 08:55, Philip Hudson wrote:
>> On 6 April 2014 17:14, Simon Waters <simon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> For all its faults everyone I know who networks Linux/Unix boxes
>>> seriously at the file system level uses NFS as the de-facto standard, or
>>> more modern distributed or clustered file systems for high availability,
>>> or clustering systems.
>> 
>> Simon and bad should be taken as authoritative on this over anything I
>> might say. I last worked in an all-*n*x shop (all Solaris) a long time
>> ago, and even then file server admin was not officially part of my
>> job. While we had NFS home directory shares that were trouble-free
>> because they were professionally admined, for all ad-hoc stuff I found
>> NFS so stinkingly buggy and fragile and unreliable and slow and
>> high-maintenance and undermaintained that I would always use anything
>> else (including netatalk, the FLOSS AppleTalk Filing System server) in
>> preference. So it may just be outworn prejudice talking when I
>> recommend Samba over NFS; I've never been disappointed by Samba itself
>> (ignoring its damnable web configurator) enough to bother
>> re-investigating NFS.
>> 
>> And yes, I do squirm at recommending a Microsoft standard. I take
>> comfort from the fact that the FLOSS Samba project sets the de facto
>> standard, with MS itself now playing catch-up. Nice to see them lose
>> in a straight fight with FLOSS.
>> 
> 
> Well, to be fair to you, if you were using Solaris or even SunOS back in
> the days then NFS would have been really, really nasty and probably
> would have broken a lot, especially if we're talking far enough back to
> be pre-NIS when it was still Yellow Pages (BT soon put paid to that name
> here in the UK).
> 
> I did a lot of Sun/SGI work back then and NFS was flaky as hell, despite
> the fact that Sun actually invented it in the first place. Once you
> threw HP-UX, AIX and all the million other types of Unix into the mix
> (and of course none of them used the standard NFS ports either, or
> rather they each had their own standard) it was amazing any of those
> £100k machines ever got any work done as they could barely talk to each
> other.
> 
> So yes, your old reminiscences of NFS being absolutely terrible back
> then are spot on. It only got bearable once NFS3 had been out for a good
> while and trickled down ever so slowly to all the different suppliers.
> 
> For whatever reasons (I think it was actually part of one of their
> *many* legal settlements, with an unusual dash of pragmatism) MS are now
> fully cooperating with Jeremy and the Samba team which has led to the
> excellent release 4, and which is rapidly catching up with the MS
> reference implementation. Now if only the greedy b'tards would enter
> into the same spirit of cooperation with Office formats we might finally
> be starting to see a thawing of the old MS/Linux cold war. I'm not
> holding my breath on that though, it's perhaps their single biggest
> stick to hit people with (one would think a business wouldn't want to
> bully their own customer base, but hey, that's the international
> software industry^H racket^H for you...)
> 
> Regards
> 
> -- 
> The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG
> http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list
> FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/listfaq


-- 
The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG
http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list
FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/listfaq