[CentOS] NFS vs SMb vs iSCSI for remote backup mounts

Rudi Ahlers rudiahlers at gmail.com
Thu Jan 28 23:23:16 UTC 2010


On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 1:18 AM, nate <centos at linuxpowered.net> wrote:

> Rudi Ahlers wrote:
>
> > nate, why not? Is it simply unavoidable at all costs to mount on system
> on
> > another, over a WAN? That's all I really want todo
>
> If what you have now works, stick with it.. in general network
> file systems are very latency sensitive.
>
> CIFS might work best *if* your using a WAN optimization appliance,
> I'm not sure how much support NFS gets from those vendors.
>
> iSCSI certainly is the worst, block devices are very intolerant of
> latency.
>
> AFS may be another option though quite a bit more complicated, as
> far as I know it's a layer on top of an existing file system that
> is used for things like replication
>
> http://www.openafs.org/
>
> I have no experience with it myself.
>
> nate
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS at centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>


Thanx nate, this is what I wanted to hear :)

So, is there any benefit in using NFS over SMB in this case? The CIFS mounts
can't be unmounted without a reboot, so they build-up a pool of mounts to
the same server which cause extra latency


-- 
Kind Regards
Rudi Ahlers
SoftDux

Website: http://www.SoftDux.com
Technical Blog: http://Blog.SoftDux.com
Office: 087 805 9573
Cell: 082 554 7532
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20100129/8ff81cd1/attachment.html 


More information about the CentOS mailing list