Both sshfs and ExpanDrive use MacFUSE under the hood. I don't know much else about ExpanDrive, but the "performance" difference that you are seeing is almost certainly because of better caching of remote things (directory contents, attributes etc.). As an end user, this should certainly appeal to you. I expect things unaffected by such caching (copying a large file, for example) to behave similarly in both cases though.
Amit On Mar 26, 11:30 am, Zanzamar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have now downloaded ExpanDrive and am comparing performance on the > two. > > I have not done any real "benchmarking" tests but I do notice a huge > increase in pulling up a list of directories/folders. (ie an ls). > For example, with SSHFS/MacFusion I was seeing 30 seconds - 1 minute, > with ExpanDrive I am seeing 3-5 seconds on average. When sshing in > obviously ls is instant. I realize because of the complications of > finder it is never going to get that good... > > With SSHFS I have tried many different combination of options > -o local,defer_permissions > -o local,allow_other,defer_permissions > -o allow_other,defer_permissions > > None of the applexattr or no apple attributes work with my setup > > None of the above options produce similar performance to what I am > seeing with ExpanDrive. > > I was curious if anyone else had any thoughts about ExpanDrive and if > it is worth the $30 fee for the "nice gui". > > As a side note. ExpanDrive's performance seems very similar in terms > of performance to how tunneling an SMB through ssh was. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "macfuse-devel" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/macfuse-devel?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
