Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Is sshfs a serious replacement for nfs? I've got a Buffalo Nas at home that I use Samba for, but Samba is too slow to watch hi-def videos over. NFS seems to be a pain in the neck to get working on that particular device, and I hate using it on a laptop. I guess I should probably just try it, but I can't see SSHFS as being any faster than Samba.



It'll probably be less performant than NFS, but is a really great and simple way for mounting remote volumes securely across the internet without having to worry about VPNs or any extra authentication or anything.


Try:

# sshfs -o direct_io,nonempty,allow_other,cache=no,compression=no,workaround=rename,workaround=nodelaysrv user@remote:/place/ /mnt/somewhere

For even more performance:

* On server, start socat:

# socat TCP4-LISTEN:7001 EXEC:/usr/lib/sftp-server

* On client, do:

# sshfs -o directport=7001,direct_io,nonempty,allow_other,cache=no,compression=no,workaround=rename,workaround=nodelaysrv user@remote:/place/ /mnt/somewhere


Whoa, what do all those options do?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: