On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 05:36:03PM -0600, Warren Young wrote: > On May 18, 2020, at 5:13 AM, hw <h...@gc-24.de> 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 <billi...@negate.org> _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
