3 ms·
The flipside is that you get coherent oplock and sharemode locking with NFS and local accesses, reasonable ACL/identity management solution across all protocols
by codex 16y ago
The flipside is that you get coherent oplock and sharemode locking with NFS and local accesses, reasonable ACL/identity management solution across all protocols, efficient support for file change notifications, etc. For these reasons I consider the in-kernel solution to be far superior feature wise as well as performance wise.
- barrkel 16y agoOplocks are an optimization I'm not in much need of; 100MB/sec transfers do just fine. That sharemode locking is by and large ignored I consider an advantage of Samba, as in my personal environment, I do not care if some program wants to exclude readers or writers, I prefer to make those choices. I don't have any applications that treat files on a file share as a multi-user database like the era of Paradox etc.; those days are long gone. I think ACLs are a bug, not a feature. They are too complex to administer both correctly and efficiently; a capability-oriented approach would be better, but that's fantasy, alas. Again, POSIX permission bits do just fine for my use cases. Reliable FCNs would be nice though.