| |||||||||||||
No, it's completely unrelated.No, it's completely unrelated.Posted Jun 4, 2009 19:32 UTC (Thu) by bronson (subscriber, #4806)In reply to: No, it's completely unrelated. by drag Parent article: Xen again
Tried sshfs 5 or so years ago, rejected it because the crypto overhead prevented me from filling a 100 MBit link. I should probably try it again since that won't be a problem nowadays.
I only mentioned DRBD to illustrate how desperate I've become! It was actually pretty good except that I couldn't get the split brain recovery to work the way I wanted. So close and yet so far. Haven't gotten desperate enough to try AFS yet!
Why doesn't 9p or webdav or some simple protocol take off? It's amazing to me that NFS and CIFS are still state of the art. I guess I don't understand the trade-offs very well.
(Log in to post comments)
No, it's completely unrelated. Posted Jun 4, 2009 20:20 UTC (Thu) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link]
For sshfs if you want to have good performance you need to disable compression. If you think the crypto has to much overhead then change the encryption method to RC4.
Very likely you were running something like 3DES that has very high overhead. And like I said you need to have a relatively recent version of OpenSSH (say a version from the past 2 years or so) for reliable service.
You can set these on a per server basis in your ~/.ssh/config
I have had no problem personally beating NFS when it comes to my personal usage at home over wireless and gigabit link.. although of course this sort of thing is not suitable for large numbers of users.
:)
|
|||||||||||||