Alright, accepted. NFS isn't exactly the proper terminology, however, RFS (Remote File System) might be a better fit for that particular question. Basically, as soon as another OS handles the files directly, you're looking at a possible collision of requests against a SQLite database, which is why I asked.
On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Keith Medcalf <kmedcalf at dessus.com> wrote: > > > All of what Richard asked and said, plus, my question of where the file > > stored in relation to the application? (Network attached storage?) > > Be careful with your terminology. The Attachment technology is pretty > much irrelevant. It is the location of the Filesystem which is important. > > Network Attached Storage means that the "connection" between the local > device adapter and the medium uses a "Network Cable" instead of, say, a > SCSI/SAS cable, and that block transport uses some kind of network > encapsulation (FC, IP, etc). Presentation is as a non-shared block device > -- it is indistinguishable from a locally attached device by the Operating > System. (In theory any multipoint connection, such as parallel SCSI or GPIB > is "Network Attached" -- that would include SAS as well I suppose, though > it is only networked up to the demux). > > Network Filesystems are usually problematic and are an entirely different > beast (despite the propensity of the marketroids to call everything > connected to a network "Network Attached Storage" thus creating > considerable confusion amongst those that do not know the difference). > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > sqlite-users mailing list > sqlite-users at mailinglists.sqlite.org > http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users >
