NFS vs CIFS

[dthompson]

Back end storage: I have been using NFS over 10GBe for years and it works really well. Are there any stability advantages with using CIFS? I feel that NFS is a proven standard and it just works. When a node is rebooted, all the storage comes back and the VM's will also come back without issues.

I'm curious to see what others recommend. I am not a huge fan of iSCSI and it seems limited in its support on proxmox with regards to snapshots.
I am also unable to implement ZFS over iSCSI as I have a back end unit (QNAP) that doesn't seem to be compatible with the proxmox implementations.

Ideally ZFS over iSCSI would be great, but not sure how to make that work unfortunately. If anyone has done this I'd love to hear.

What type of back end shared storage are people running?

 

[sdet00]

Right now I'm using CIFS. It's okay, but I feel that Proxmox struggles with this sometimes. For example, I tried creating a virtual disk for my Proxmox Backup Server - unfortunately this lead to backups that failed to verify. That said I have other virtual disks mounting over CIFS that works fine. I am yet to try this on NFS but will give it a go, am curious if performance is any different as well as I feel that CIFS can be quite CPU intensive sometimes.

 

[hapklaar]

I also use CIFS (on OMV on Thecus N5550 NAS) as I have always been using it for Windows. I read somewhere that NFS is slower than CIFS, but am interested in real life tests to see if there is any noticeable difference.

 

[triks]

Connecting to a Synology NAS NFS v4.0 has always made more sense to me. For starters; less overheads, no authentication just trust IP or IP subnet. Is NFS "native" to Linux - thought I read that somewhere. One thing I do notice is NFS doesn't deal as well with recovering after bottlenecks and disconnections as CIFS/SMB does.