Samba replacing NFS

Florian G. Pflug fgp at
Sat Oct 24 10:06:12 GMT 1998

> I have a number of web servers that mount their /htdocs (and /log and
> /cgi-bin) directories from a large file server. I am currently using NFS
> for this. The web servers are Linux, the file server a Sun E450. NFS seems
> dreadfully slow, and I keep reading about how it doesn't do file locking.
> Is there a good reason not to simply use samba, and share the volumes with
> samba from the Sun, and use smbmount on the linux machines? Will this not
> be faster? (It could hardly be slower).
> It seems perverse to use a Win32 protocol between to *nix machines, but NFS
> just seems very very slow.
> Can anyone think of a good reason _not_ to use samba in this situation?

I guess samba would be faster than NFS, but why don't you just put /htdocs
and /cgi-bin on a local disk of the web-server. This seems much cleaner to
me. If you need to change the web-site quite often, you could either export
/htdoc and /cgi-bin from the web-server via NFS, samba,
marw_nwe(novell-emulation),... or you edit the files on the Sun like you do
now, and rsync them with the files on the web-server (you find info about
rsync on the internet). 

I guess you share the /log dir to have one machine, where every server
logs... well syslogd has this feature already built-in.. it can log to any
server you want it to...

Hope this helps.... Florian

More information about the samba mailing list