Re: Is nfs reliable?
Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2016 07:53:03 -0700
Message-ID: <CAPt39tv7mKS4unqu0ND+1BxaQiX5rX1CigjRPKJSCXA6rO-uxg_at_mail.gmail.com>
Thank you Tim,
I have used nfs for storage since at least 2000 and always found it the
easiest to configure. With 10g ethernet we got awesome performance.
Since I have never had a problem with nfs I just had to ask Oracle-L if
anyone had ever heard of nfs being unreliable.
Michael
On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 6:39 AM, Tim Gorman <tim_at_evdbt.com> wrote:
> UDP is an unreliable protocol, whereas TCP is reliable. Initially, the
> default protocol for NFS was UDP. Since NFSv3, TCP has been an option and
> is now the default with NFSv4.
>
> NFS over TCP is as reliable as locally-attached storage or SAN storage.
>
>
>
>
>
> On 6/2/16 23:02, Michael Cunningham wrote:
>
> I had someone tell me today that nfs should not be relied on and it should
> not be used for a shared mount that needed to be reliably available.
>
> Has anyone ever hear this before?
>
> --
> Michael Cunningham
>
>
>
--
Michael Cunningham
--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Received on Fri Jun 03 2016 - 16:53:03 CEST