[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Samba or NFS

On 06/03/11 at 12:43pm, John A. Sullivan III wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jari Fredriksson" <jarif@iki.fi>
> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
> Sent: Friday, June 3, 2011 11:58:15 AM
> Subject: Re: Samba or NFS
> 3.6.2011 18:08, Dan kirjoitti:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I have two linux servers. One file server (debian) that is running
> > samba and one application server (redhat). I would like to mount the
> > shares of the file server in the application server. The problem is
> > that the usernames are very different. Samba is already running and
> > easier to set-up. NFS seems to be more difficult to set-up and also
> > there are more security issues.
> > 
> > Which are the advantages of NFS over Samba (cifs) other than the
> > symbolic links. I read that even some people prefer samba over NFS to
> > connect Unix to Unix.
> > 
> NFS is by far simpler to use in pure Linux environment, Samba is for
> Windows networks. NFS has no passwords, just install it with apt-get,
> and declare /etc/exports in the server, and mount the shares in the
> clients /etc/fstab. That's all it takes.
> NFS offers native looking folders to *nix machines over networks.
> <snip>
> I don't know a lot about either but is "no passwords" still true with NFS4? Even if it is, is that one of the security issues the original poster is concerned about?
> Under heavy concurrent usage, are there locking issues with either? Which performs better under heavy load with lots of random file IO? I am particularly interested because our environment has been build around iSCSI.  There is a possible shift in a core technology for us which may shift us from a SAN using iSCSI to a NAS using either NFS or SMB so we, too, are quite interested in others' experiences.  Thanks - John

SANs will almost always perform better than NAS', FWIW. 

NFS has the better load handling and has good locking (provided you run it as recommended with portmap, statd, etc.)
Samba is primarily used to share files to windows hosts.

The security architecture of NFSv3 and earlier is based on simple UID reliance. You can stop root access altogether, and there's little concern of NFS leading to a system being corrupted, but it IS technically possible for a malicious user to delete other users files if you have write allowed. NFS is usually used in environments with trusted users (i.e. share only to specific machines, not the world). 


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: