Hacker News Reader

Thank you. I'm using sshfs every day to remotely access my computer and servers from my laptop. Although it's slow, it works. I'm considering to switch to NFS instead.

View on HN

NFS doesn't do great on high-latency connections, but it really shines on (and was designed for) a high-speed LAN.

All machines (~ 10 highly diverse) in my home lab mounts my $HOME over NFSv4 from a TrueNAS server. Works very well. I can saturate 10 GbE easily (and have 100 GbE point-to-point to the main compute server). SSHFS is just crazy slow in comparison, has tremendous CPU load, doesn't have reliable coherency semantics (well it can, but then it's even slower). However, creating an ad-hoc sshfs mount is trivial unlike with NFSv4. Also, SSHFS is of course encryped on the wire unlike NFSv4.

TL;DR: both have valid use cases, but for a home file server I'd definitely choose NFSv4 for Unix (*BSD, Linux, macOS) hosts (know nothing about Windows).

> know nothing about Windows

TL;DR: If your shares are on the Windows machine just use SMB, *nix SMB clients work fine. NFS Server works on Windows, but depending on the client it works fine or you would preferred it didn't work at all.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com