Messages in this thread |  | | From | Neil Brown <> | Date | Mon, 10 Sep 2001 16:55:22 +1000 (EST) | Subject | Re: nfs is stupid ("getfh failed") |
| |
On Friday September 7, rothwell@holly-springs.nc.us wrote: > > Just wondering if there's been any talk, plans, etc. of an alternative for > NFS. > > > What exactly do you mean by "better" anyway? > > Better security, better performance. > > Thanks, > > -M
NFSv2 and 3 do allow better security, but it isn't often implemented. I am working on putting some infrastructure in place so that crypto-authentication can be added to nfsd in a nice modular way. Ofcourse the client will need to speak the same authentication protocol too.
Then there is NFSv4 which might improve performance in some circumstances, though it could do more....
SUNs "cachefs" concept can be used to improve read performance by caching a lot more of server-data on the client. That could be implemented for Linux, but I don't know of anyone with serious plans.
NeilBrown - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |