[CentOS] NFS vs SMb vs iSCSI for remote backup mounts
nate
centos at linuxpowered.netThu Jan 28 23:18:28 UTC 2010
- Previous message: [CentOS] NFS vs SMb vs iSCSI for remote backup mounts
- Next message: [CentOS] NFS vs SMb vs iSCSI for remote backup mounts
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
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
- Previous message: [CentOS] NFS vs SMb vs iSCSI for remote backup mounts
- Next message: [CentOS] NFS vs SMb vs iSCSI for remote backup mounts
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the CentOS mailing list