RE: NFS or smbfs Filesystems for IDS backup?

Hi Richard, I prefer NFS over CIFS/SMB as it is stateless where the latter is statefull. NFS mounts survive network outages where CIFS/SMB shares don't. The slightest loss of comms will render your SMB connection stale & you'll have to restart your SMB client. We used to run databases off NFS shares (also off CIFS shares which we quickly stopped) without problems. A good NFS server implementation helps & generally the default options need to be tuned. Mount your filesystem over udp on NFS v3. Tune the read & writesize. If you have the option of using jumbo frames do. You have to choose between two devils - using M$'s NFS server or a UNIX implementation of CIFS :-) Good luck. Why don't you use onbar with ISM & file devices? Regards, > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-informix-list@iiug.org > [mailto:owner-informix-list@iiug.org] On Behalf Of Richard Spitz > Sent: 15 February 2005 19:16 > To: informix-list@iiug.org > Subject: NFS or smbfs Filesystems for IDS backup? > > Dear Informixers, > > for years, I've been backing up my logical logs and IDS data to > disk using "ontape" with homebrewn scripts. Works like a charm > on an "old" (4 years) Linux box (SuSE 7.2, Kernel 2.4.18) with > IDS 7.31UD8. > > Now diskspace is running low on this machine, so I'm considering > mounting an external filesystem for this purpose. I only have a > Windows 2003 server for serving diskspace, and I could either > mount a native Windows share from the Linux box via Samba (version > 2.2.8a) or install Microsoft Services for Unix 3.5 and export > a share via NFS. > > Which one of these two methods would be preferable for this purpose, > or is neither one fast and/or safe enough and the only way to go > would be to install additional disks? > > Regards, Richard > > > Disclaimer http://www.shoprite.co.za/disclaimer.html sending to informix-list