Re: nfs is stupid ("getfh failed")

[Neil Brown]

On Friday September 7, [e-mail] wrote:
> 
> Just wondering if there's been any talk, plans, etc. of an alternative for
> NFS.
> 
> > What exactly do you mean by "better" anyway?
> 
> Better security, better performance.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> -M

NFSv2 and 3 do allow better security, but it isn't often implemented.
I am working on putting some infrastructure in place so that
crypto-authentication can be added to nfsd in a nice modular way.
Ofcourse the client will need to speak the same authentication
protocol too.

Then there is NFSv4 which might improve performance in some
circumstances, though it could do more....

SUNs "cachefs" concept can be used to improve read performance by
caching a lot more of server-data on the client.  That could be
implemented for Linux, but I don't know of anyone with serious plans.

NeilBrown