smbmount vs. smbclient

[jbk at mail2.gis.net (jbk)]

Kristian Hermansen wrote:
> On 3/12/07, jbk <jbk at mail2.gis.net> wrote:
>> I have not exceeded the speed limit on my home network which
>> I have been using samba for 10 years. I can run it through a
> 
> The problem is with the protocol efficiency in comparison.  Set up an
> NFS server, and see how fast you can pipe the data you've been trying
> over SMB for years.
Now that I know NFS is faster I can just share the streaming 
media over NFS if performance ever is an issue.
> 
>> firewall and stream music over it and view videos at the
>> same time. It is fairly easy to set up and is well
>> documented. NFS may be better but is more difficult to setup
>> as it requires six different ports for the 3 sub protocols
>> that it utilizes to operate.
> 
> If it is a local network, NFS should be used.  You trust all your
> users.  And it is more efficient.  I just copied a 500M file from my
> machine locally, on the same box, using the loopback interface, with
> both protocols.  NFS blew away SMB in comparison.  But don't just take
> my word for it...

No, I don't trust all the users on my network. I trust that 
teenagers will seek out all corners of the data base if 
something sparks their interest. I can't predict what that 
is and I do have sensitive personal data on the server.
>> What home environment requires NFS? A home environment as I
>> define it is isolated to the cabling or access point that
>> serves only your household and no other hosting. How do
>> others define it? When someone says a protocol sucks I want
>> to know at what scale that is.
> 
> Sure.  For per share security (and Windows compatibility), go with
> SMB.  But most people on a local network just share their MP3 folders,
> etc.  They usually don't really need per share ACLs anyway.  So, if
> you have only nix hosts on your network, and you trust your local
> network, why not use NFS?  Did I miss a point you were trying to make
> here?  By 'sucks', I meant in terms of performance...
I do have MS workstations and linux workstations. If I were 
serving a large network that had a high demand for large 
file transfers I would consider NFS to serve that specific 
data base.

Jim K-R

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.