Re: NFS alternative
On Fri, Jul 20, 2001 at 07:26:21PM -0700, Francois Gouget wrote:
> Well, of course you can bet that all these issues have been taken
> into account in the design of the NFS protocol.
> But actually this touches an important aspect of NFS servers: by
> design/philosophy they are stateless. This means that the NFS server can
> crash, reboot, and to the client it makes strictly no difference (the
> same goes for the client). And this fits well with UDP since it's a
> connectionless protocol.
> Compare this to the SMB protocol used by Windows. This protocol is
> resolutely stateful. And guess what: SMB uses TCP connections. So if the
> server crashes then the clients have to reconnect to the server and try
> to resynchronize their state with the state of the server somehow. Well,
> of course, the designers of the SMB protocol thought of the issue too
> and I'm sure it's all taken care of.
Actually, if the SMB server goes down, all state is lost...
Reply to: