Robert r. Sanders schrieb:
Having tried mapping a WeDAV
location as a network drive I can say that it really doesn't work in a
usable fashion.
Really? So far I experienced a generally suboptimal perfomance
but it works just as well as CIFS for me, both on MacOSX and Windows.
What issues did you encounter?
We tried Win2k client machines connecting to a Subversion server set to
auto-version. Opening a "web folder" worked ok; but trying to map that
to a drive letter seemed to result in all sorts of issues, one of which
I believe was an infinite loop in the login prompt. Its been over a
year, so the details have gotten kind of fuzzy. Anyway, we were trying
to use non-WebDAV aware programs (e.g. Flash, Wave file editors, etc...)
and this also seemed to often result in zero-byte files being stored on
the server. Maybe a different combination on the server-side would have
fixed the issue, I can't say.
Well. If programs act suboptimal when presented with a JCR server mapped
to a drive letter through WebDAV, why do you think they'll work any
better with a JCR server mapped to a drive letter through CIFS? It's
only a different transport, but I don't think the main issues (*) will
go away.
Best regards, Julian
(*) such as: lots of temp files, no use of locking, creating new files
and moving them over instead of overwriting existing ones, causing loss
of metadata
