10

Has anyone set up NFS where both the server and the clients are all Windows? I am wondering:

  • How Does Performance Compare to using builtin Windows file sharing (CIFS/SMB)?
  • Can clients mount NFS shares as network drives just like with regular file sharing?
  • Any recommended tools since Windows does not support this natively?
  • Does doing this provide reliable file sharing?
6

CIFS/SMB really should be your choice for Windows clients & servers - NFS can be very insecure without the hassle of Kerberos. Using SMB you get the standard Windows security model.

  • Performance wise there is not not much much in it - possibly SMB is a bit faster.
  • XP needs Windows Services for UNIX (here) to mount NFS
  • Windows Server can only mount NFS shares not offer them. It has to use SMB.
  • Reliability for an XP client mounting an NFS share from a Linux server so far has been fine, although we only have a couple of machines doing this.

In conclusion for a Windows server, NFS is not an option. For an XP client only use NFS if you have to - due to only having a Linux server when you don't want the hassle of setting up SAMBA

  • 4
    NFS is much lighter and much faster than SMB. This is the old question though but at that time NFS were faster anyways. – bakytn Jan 30 '12 at 16:30
  • Windows Server can provide a NFS share to other OSes, but the performance on a Linux client is very bad. – David Refoua Jul 23 '18 at 9:53
  • What's the case now in 2019? – ttimasdf Aug 14 at 1:44

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.