[Samba] smb/cifs or nfsv3: which is "cheaper"
Anthony Messina
amessina at messinet.com
Thu Feb 16 10:36:50 GMT 2006
I will soon be implementing a Fedora Core 4 (or 5), 2.8MHz Xeon, 1GB
RAM, 2.5TB storage, gigabit ethernet server which will hold backup
copies of about 200 DVDs. These DVDs will be played through a gigabit
LAN to another Fedora Core 4 (or 5) workstation using xine which will
then output video to the projector in my living room.
I am not asking to start a competition or war on the list.
My question is, which is "cheaper" both in terms of processing power and
network overhead: nfsv3 or smbfs or cifs? I'll also take information on
nfsv4, though that is not my current setup.
I use Samba for tons of Linux <--> Windows things, but since this is a
Linux <--> Linux thing, I wasn't sure which way to go in order to
minimize the use of the new processor and minimize unnecessary network
traffic.
I am asking on this list as some Samba experts may already know the
answer or could point me in the right direction (and I do not subscribe
to any nfs lists).
Thanks in advance. -Anthony
--
My Website: http://messinet.com
My Online Gallery:
http://messinet.com/modules.php?name=Web_Links&l_op=visit&lid=3
More information about the samba
mailing list