Sorry to hijack the thread, but has anyone successfully used NFS for anything worthwhile? Samba is fast, but has problems with unix permissions. NFS was slow as molasses every time I tried to use it.
I'm using sshfs for most of my remote filesystem needs now.
I've been exclusively using my $HOME over NFSv4 across many boxen for years. My NFS is exported by TrueNAS CORE [1] powered by an EPYC 7443P (recent upgrade). I can saturate my 100 GbE (~ 12.6 GiB/s) with NFS traffic.
In my testing, NFS meaningfully but not substantially beat Samba in bandwidth and with much less server load (sorry I didn't keep data).
Even though using a NAS is slower than a native RAID0 of NVMe/PCIeG4 drives, it gives me shared, automatic snapshots, automatic replications, etc. It's totally worth it.
NFSv4 rules.
ADD:
[1] TrueNAS SCALE was _just_ released and I'll be evaluating this seriously and expect to migrate to it.
> Sorry to hijack the thread, but has anyone successfully used NFS for anything worthwhile?
I'm sure it's less common these days with everything on "the cloud" (far less convenient), but in the old days entire companies ran on NFS. Thousands of workstations, with dozens-to-hundreds of NFS servers mapped to a global filesystem hierarchy, automounting as needed.
So the answer to "has anyone" is yes, lots of companies, for a couple decades.
I do miss it, it was so super convenient to have everything in what seemed one giant filesystem.
At a tiny scale I still have the convenience at home. My file server (ZFS) exports various filesystems to all other machines in the house (via zfs sharenfs).
I'm using sshfs for most of my remote filesystem needs now.