cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de 3 weeks ago
NFS is the best option if you only need to access the shared drives over your LAN. If you want to mount them over the internet, there’s SSHFS.
I agree, NFS is eazy peazy, livin greazy.
I have an old ds211j synology for backup. I just can’t bring myself to replace it, it still works. However, it doesn’t support zfs. I wish I could get another Linux running on this thing.
However, NFS does work on it and is so simple and easy to lock down, it works in a ton of corner cases like mine.
NFS is easy as long as you use very basic access control. When you want NFSv4 with Kerberos auth you’re entering a world of pain and tears.
I don’t use access control, I lock down with networking and filters.
Afaik Synology supports Btrfs which I honestly prefer at this point if you don’t need filesystem based encryption or professionall scaling and caching features.
The ds211j is on synology DSM 6, which is ancient. I’ll look again, but I don’t think it supports btrfs.
The lower end Synology NAS (like my DS420j) don’t support btrfs. They only support ext4, I think.
What about NFS over the internet?
You can use NFS over the internet, but it will be a lot more work to secure it. It was intended for use over a LAN and performance may not be great over the internet, especially with high latency or packet loss.
I would just create a point to point VPN connection and run it over that (for axample an IPsec tunnel using strongswan)
My one change: I do SSHFS over LAN, because of guest machines and sniffing potential.
I do NFS on direct wire or on a confidently set up VLAN (maybe).
I use exclusively sshfs, including in my lan, is there some downside to it?
SSHFS is slower than NFS due to the encryption and FUSE. It’s not a huge difference with a modern CPU and a 1 gbps connection, but it can be significant with an older CPU or a faster network.
BonkTheAnnoyed@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 weeks ago
See, this is interesting. I’m out here looking for the new shiny easy button, but what I’m hearing is “the old config-file based thing works really well. ain’t broken, etc.”
I may give that a swing and see.
curbstickle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 weeks ago
I’m at the same age - just to mention, samba is nowhere near the horror show it used to be. That said, I use NFS for my Debian boxes and mac mini build box to hit my NAS, samba for the windows laptop.
roofuskit@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Yeah, Samba has come a long way. I run a Linux based server but all clients are Windows or Android so it just makes sense to run SMB shares instead of NFS.
ImgurRefugee114@reddthat.com 3 weeks ago
I’ve always had weird issues with SMB like ghost files, issues with case sensitivity (zfs pool), it dropping out and me having to reboot to re-establish the connection… Since switching to Linux and using NFS, it’s been almost indistinguishable from a native drive for my casual use (including using a ssd pool as a steam library…)
WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
you and perhaps @curbstickle@lemmy.dbzer0.com, may I ask if you use samba with portable devices, like laptops?
I do and my experience is that pograms that try to access it when I don’t have network access tend to freeze, including my desktop environment, but any file managers too if I click the wrong place by accident. but it occurs enough without user action too.
oh and it breaks all machines at once if the server or network is down. which is rare but very annoying.
did you experience this too? do you have some advice? is SMB just unsuitable for this?
honestly I would prefer if the cifs driver would keep track of last successful communication, and if it was long ago instantly fail all accesses. without unmounting so that open directories and file handles keep being valid.
and if all software on this world wouldn’t behave as if they were doing IO on the main thread. honestly this went smoother with windows clients but I’m not going back.
lightnsfw@reddthat.com 3 weeks ago
Same. I’ve used SMB for years. Don’t have any problems with it across all my Windows and Android devices. Pretty sure I had an iPad in there at one point as well.
Bakkoda@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
I’ve run Proxmox hosts with smb shares for literally decades without issues. Performance is line speed now. Only issues I’ve ever had were operator error and that was a long time ago. SMB 3 works great.