Greg Oliver wrote:
SMB versus nfs and smb being faster is impossible IMO.
This is one case where you shouldn't fall for the "invented by
Microsoft" trap. Actually, performance on a properly tuned SMB share
(both client and server tuned) will quite possibly be greater than on a
properly tuned NFS share (client/server tuned). /However/, properly
tuning an SMB share is extremely difficult compared to tuning an NFS
share, so in the real world, you're likely to never see a properly tuned
SMB share (at least when either the client or the server is not
Microsoft-based, and with both client and server running MS, other
issues--like differences in cp/copy--are likely to obscure testing
results)--meaning SMB will typically appear less performant than NFS
Note, also, that a server tuned for NFS will likely have poor SMB
performance and vice-versa because the required options are very different.
Mike
_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users
