@rl_dane @stefano @stefano modern SMB is actually good but clearly there's some special sauce that Windows does to make it so fast. MacOS has a pretty okay implementation but it's atrocious on Linux/BSD -- presumably due to the massive software fragmentation. I think Windows/Mac knows how to avoid unnecessary IO but the experience browsing it with terminal vs KDE dolphin vs Thunar etc is wildly different. I think some treat it like a local filesystem because it doesn't know any better and it wastes so much trying to get image/video/document previews etc etc
Timeline
Post
Remote status
Context
1
NetApp's CIFS implementation was also fantastic, for its time. Admittedly, I haven't administered any NetApp systems since 2006?
However, even back then, at a "Windows shop" type company? They did not trust Micro$oft for SMB and that was the norm. NetApp's CIFS was way more reliable.
CC: @stefano@bsd.cafe @rl_dane@polymaths.social
However, even back then, at a "Windows shop" type company? They did not trust Micro$oft for SMB and that was the norm. NetApp's CIFS was way more reliable.
CC: @stefano@bsd.cafe @rl_dane@polymaths.social
Replies
0
No replies yet.