[gentoo-user] Suggested network fs for small lan ?

[gentoo-user] Suggested network fs for small lan ?

[Enrico Weigelt]

Hi folks,

what network filesystem would you suggest for an small LAN ?

I'm currently running NFS on 2.4 and 2.6, the machines are 
somethimes mounting each other, and that's not really satisfying
(ie. load loops up, locking fails, etc).


cu
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Enrico Weigelt    ==   metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce:
 	http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce
 Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions:
	http://patches.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Suggested network fs for small lan ?

[Alexander Skwar]

Enrico Weigelt schrieb:

> what network filesystem would you suggest for an small LAN ?

NFS. If Windows systems need to access the resources, I'd think
about installing MS SFU on those boxes.

Alexander Skwar
-- 
bureaucrat, n:
	A politician who has tenure.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Suggested network fs for small lan ?

[kashani]

Alexander Skwar wrote:
> Enrico Weigelt schrieb:
> 
>> what network filesystem would you suggest for an small LAN ?
> 
> NFS. If Windows systems need to access the resources, I'd think
> about installing MS SFU on those boxes.
> 

	I spent a week fighting with SFU on 2003 last month. While I'm sure I 
missed a number of things and did a few things wrong it was far simpler 
to run NFS for the Linux boxes and Samba for the Windows boxes on the 
main storage head rather than trying to get Windows to play nicely with 
NFS. YMMV.

	On the original question a dedicated NFS server sounds like a solution 
rather than chaining NFS through multiple machines.

kashani
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Suggested network fs for small lan ?

[Nick Rout]

On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 10:08:51 -0700
kashani <kashani-list@badapple.net> wrote:

> Alexander Skwar wrote:
> > Enrico Weigelt schrieb:
> > 
> >> what network filesystem would you suggest for an small LAN ?
> > 
> > NFS. If Windows systems need to access the resources, I'd think
> > about installing MS SFU on those boxes.
> > 
> 
> 	I spent a week fighting with SFU on 2003 last month. While I'm sure I 
> missed a number of things and did a few things wrong it was far simpler 
> to run NFS for the Linux boxes and Samba for the Windows boxes on the 
> main storage head rather than trying to get Windows to play nicely with 
> NFS. YMMV.
> 
> 	On the original question a dedicated NFS server sounds like a solution 
> rather than chaining NFS through multiple machines.

I wasted days getting NFS to not work. I switched to CIFS. It is working very well.

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Suggested network fs for small lan ?

[Alexander Skwar]

Nick Rout schrieb:

> I wasted days getting NFS to not work. I switched to CIFS. It is working very well.

Is file locking working over CIFS? How about permissions
and ownership? Working as well and easy as it does on NFS?
What kind of problems did you have with NFS - I'm asking,
as I can't think about anything easier than NFS on *nix.

Alexander Skwar
-- 
I know how to do SPECIAL EFFECTS!!
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Suggested network fs for small lan ?

[Andrew Frink]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1030 bytes --]

On 7/22/06, Alexander Skwar <listen@alexander.skwar.name> wrote:
>
> Nick Rout schrieb:
>
> > I wasted days getting NFS to not work. I switched to CIFS. It is working
> very well.
>
> Is file locking working over CIFS? How about permissions
> and ownership? Working as well and easy as it does on NFS?
> What kind of problems did you have with NFS - I'm asking,
> as I can't think about anything easier than NFS on *nix.
>
> Alexander Skwar
> --
> I know how to do SPECIAL EFFECTS!!
> --
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list




Alexander,
i would say that NFS is the easiest if all of your UID's are the same for
every user on the network, there is no reason that you would ever want mount
it from the outside, through a packet mangling NAT with your normal
permissions, and you have static IP's. that seems to be alot of conditions
to me. I personaly would love to NFS+ that had some form of public key auth
in it and encryption, yes i know you can do it with SSH tunnles, but still
doesn't fix the permissions problem

Andrew

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1429 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Suggested network fs for small lan ?

[Nick Rout]

On Sat, 22 Jul 2006 09:41:51 +0200
Alexander Skwar <listen@alexander.skwar.name> wrote:

> Nick Rout schrieb:
> 
> > I wasted days getting NFS to not work. I switched to CIFS. It is working very well.
> 
> Is file locking working over CIFS? 

I don't know and I really don't need it, I am basically storing multmedia files and playing them over the network.

>How about permissions
> and ownership?

seems to work fine, this has improved markedly with the cifs unix extensions. 

> Working as well and easy as it does on NFS?
> What kind of problems did you have with NFS - I'm asking,
> as I can't think about anything easier than NFS on *nix.
> 

I cannot recall now, and it may have been operator error. It is so long ago that I can't recall the details.

> Alexander Skwar
> -- 
> I know how to do SPECIAL EFFECTS!!
> -- 
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
> 
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list