On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 05:36:03PM -0600, Warren Young wrote:
> On May 18, 2020, at 5:13 AM, hw <hw@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Is there a better alternative for mounting remote file systems
> > over unreliable
> > connections?
>
> I don’t have a good answer for you, because if you’d asked me
> without all this backstory whether NFS or SSHFS is more tolerant of
> bad connections, I’d have told you SSHFS.
On the other hand, NFS is a fully-featured filesystem that supports
fancy features like locking and a full ACL system. SSHFS is a FUSE
filesystem that will break a lot of software if you try to use it for
anything more complex than 'ls' and 'cp'.
For what it's worth, Samba with SMBv3 and the POSIX extension[1] is a
lot more tolerant of bad connections, and presents itself as a real
filesystem under linux.
1. https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/SMB3-Linux
--
Jonathan Billings <billings@xxxxxxxxxx>
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
