Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

NFS Client Changes For Linux 5.15 Bring Connection Sharing, Better Responsiveness

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • NFS Client Changes For Linux 5.15 Bring Connection Sharing, Better Responsiveness

    Phoronix: NFS Client Changes For Linux 5.15 Bring Connection Sharing, Better Responsiveness

    While Linux 5.15 has added KSMBD as an SMB3 in-kernel file server, the NFS code within the Linux kernel continues advancing as well for network file sharing needs. With NFS in Linux 5.15 are a few notable improvements...

    Phoronix, Linux Hardware Reviews, Linux hardware benchmarks, Linux server benchmarks, Linux benchmarking, Desktop Linux, Linux performance, Open Source graphics, Linux How To, Ubuntu benchmarks, Ubuntu hardware, Phoronix Test Suite

  • #2
    Originally posted by phoronix View Post
    The default max_connect value is 1 but can allow up to 16 connections, hardware permitting.
    This sentence is kind of confusing. It should be something like "can allow up to 16 connections as long as the hardware allows it".

    Comment


    • #3
      I use NFS between my home computers. I only have Linux machines so Samba feels odd.
      My only gripe with it is how complicated it is to set up initially.
      When I say "how complicated", don't get me wrong. When you've found a guide that is simple and just works such as the one on the Ubuntu website it's alright and easily adaptable to another distro with its own package names and specificities.
      But I shouldn't have to search the Internet for hours for this.
      It should be as simple as a right click on a folder in my file manager and check a box to share on the network with some permission levels. Just as Windows Explorer or Samba manage file sharing.
      There is a Simple NFS GUI app but it didn't work for me. Playing with fstab and exportfs for such a basic feature in 2021 feels strange, and only a few would use it over Samba for that reason.
      Although Samba without Windows machines on your network feels mispurposed (not a word, but you got it).

      I feel like they should improve the ease of setting it up on top of other things, yet I don't see anything in that regard in the changes.
      Last edited by Mez'; 03 September 2021, 07:29 AM.

      Comment


      • #4
        I'm really interested in "Better client responsiveness when server isn't replying".

        AFAIK if filesystem is not responding (doesn't matter if it's network server or underlying block device), every userspace application, trying to read from it, just freezes. And good luck trying to unmount it.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Mez' View Post
          I use NFS between my home computers. I only have Linux machines so Samba feels odd.
          My only gripe with it is how complicated it is to set up initially.
          When I say "how complicated", don't get me wrong. When you've found a guide that is simple and just works such as the one on the Ubuntu website it's alright and easily adaptable to another distro with its own package names and specificities.
          But I shouldn't have to search the Internet for hours for this.
          It should be as simple as a right click on a folder in my file manager and check a box to share on the network with some permission levels. Just as Windows Explorer or Samba manage file sharing.
          There is a Simple NFS GUI app but it didn't work for me. Playing with fstab and exportfs for such a basic feature in 2021 feels strange, and only a few would use it over Samba for that reason.
          Although Samba without Windows machines on your network feels mispurposed (not a word, but you got it).

          I feel like they should improve the ease of setting it up on top of other things, yet I don't see anything in that regard in the changes.
          Samba works rather well between linuxes too, supporting unix extensions, btrfs reflink copies, io_uring, encryption, etc.

          But i agree with you that it is far to tricky to set up right - for both methods. Not to mention that network browsing is lacking a great deal.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Mez' View Post
            I feel like they should improve the ease of setting it up on top of other things, yet I don't see anything in that regard in the changes.
            This is really a Gnome or KDE thing because setting up Samba manually is fairly similar in terms of complexity. Unfortunately ease of use and usefulness are outside the scope of most Linux desktop environments. As it stands it is actually easier to set up an NFS server via the GUI on Windows than on Linux desktop environments.

            Luckily as you mentioned, neither NFS or Samba are not too difficult to set up. Especially since you only need to write the script once and then adapt it in future. Just yet another reason to not really be bothered to install a full fat DE.

            Comment


            • #7
              I wish Linux finally supported file capabilities over NFS4 :-(

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Mez' View Post
                I use NFS between my home computers. I only have Linux machines so Samba feels odd.
                My only gripe with it is how complicated it is to set up initially.
                When I say "how complicated", don't get me wrong. When you've found a guide that is simple and just works such as the one on the Ubuntu website it's alright and easily adaptable to another distro with its own package names and specificities.
                But I shouldn't have to search the Internet for hours for this.
                Brother, if all your home computers are Linux, I truly don't get the objection to editing two of the most simple conf files on the platform. Especially since search to finalizing setup takes about 15 minutes if you completely can't remember how and stop for a smoke halfway through. I mean, it's not like you're trying to set up sendmail; this is a dirt simple process in the Linux world.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Wtf is meant by sharing connections between servers? Does this mean that a client can be migrated between servers if they mount a directory from both of them, or a directory mounted inside another mount?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Developer12 View Post
                    Wtf is meant by sharing connections between servers? Does this mean that a client can be migrated between servers if they mount a directory from both of them, or a directory mounted inside another mount?
                    The bit you left out is the bit that explains it. "with multiple NICs". If a server has multiple NICs, you don't have to pick just one now.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X