OT: NFS and iOS -

Bob Goodwin - Zuni, Virginia, USA bobgoodwin at wildblue.net
Thu Nov 20 23:34:56 UTC 2014

On 11/20/14 17:56, Chris Murphy wrote:
> I'm kinda coming into this discussion late.
> SMB is pretty universal, so if you want to simplify you can just serve
> over SMB. Windows, OS X, iOS, and Linux clients can all use it. For
> iOS I'm finding "FileExplorer Free" By Steven Zhang.
> There are some drawbacks using both SMB and NFS on the same directory:
> there are different file name limitations, so it's possible to be
> allowed to name a file via SMB, and then not access or delete the file
> on NFS; and vice versa. And I think xattr aren't possible with NFS.
> "the data" can be at <pathtodata> which would be a mount point for the
> brick it's stored on; and then
> # mount -B <pathtodata> <smbshare>
> # mount -B <pathtodata> <nfsshare>
> So you get different directories configured for SMB vs NFS sharing,
> but due to the bind mount the underlying storage is the same.
> Netatalk is an open source implementation of AFP (Apple Filing
> Protocol). Presently Apple OS X starting with version 10.9 (about a
> year ago) prefers SMB over AFP for file sharing. It still prefers AFP
> over SMB for remote Time Machine Backups as there are some features
> Time Machine needs that aren't available yet in SMB.
> WebDAV sounds like it's viable also, having the benefit of better
> performance externally (shares over the internet). I get a bunch of
> file size limitation results with Google, but all seem to be Windows
> (as host) limitations, not something inherent to WebDAV. There's also
> some speculation that internal sharing via WedDAV doesn't perform as
> well. But WebDAV's advantage is that it doesn't have ancient versions,
> all of which SMB is expected to fall back on. I've found Samba to be
> quite a bit more difficult to setup than either Netatalk or NFS. I
> haven't done a WebDAV setup yet but it sounds interesting. What I'd
> want to know is if remote modification is OK, rather than transfer
> locally, modify, transfer back to remote - that's a PITA workflow I
> think. Implies file locking is necessary.

We ran with Freenas/smb for six months or more and my main concern is 
the iPads and Mac portables. I used NFS because I am comfortable with 
it, put all my data, etc. on it. But I know Samba will do what's needed. 
I will probably set it up with Samba and forget NFS on that server. I'll 
put it off 'til tomorrow.

Thanks for your comments,


box10  Fedora-20/64bit Linux/XFCE

More information about the users mailing list