Comment by uecker
14 days ago
I am not sure why this means why "NFS is really stupid" if the user assumes that a distributed file system can be treated just like a local system. That is provides the same interface is what makes NFS extremely useful.
14 days ago
I am not sure why this means why "NFS is really stupid" if the user assumes that a distributed file system can be treated just like a local system. That is provides the same interface is what makes NFS extremely useful.
And also, this is what makes NFS useless.
Latency is at least two orders of magnitude higher. That is the (relevant) difference here. And treating it like a loc system with all the incidental non-optimizations made the NAS use-case take 40 hours for colored "ls" output.
I find it extremely useful and it works well for many use cases. This already implies that "it is useless" is pure nonsense. If it does not work for your usecase, just don't use it.
The basic argument was "NFS is stupid". The basis for this claim is its data model being ill-suited to network latency. This is different from "useless".