Super User is a question and answer site for computer enthusiasts and power users. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I have a server at home accesible via local WIFI. I also have several laptops. I share folders in the server using sshfs due to its ease-of-use. But sometimes I notice lots of connections issues with the shared folders.

Is NFS a better solution?

share|improve this question

closed as not constructive by Paul, Dave M, Julian Knight, Oliver Salzburg Mar 7 '13 at 15:29

As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

The answer to your question is really subjective. If NFS meets all your requirements you should switch. – Ramhound Mar 7 '13 at 11:12
Agree that this is really off-topic. I would consider rephrasing the question so that there can be a definitive answer. Perhaps asking a question around preventing lost connections. – Julian Knight Mar 7 '13 at 15:20
up vote 4 down vote accepted

I've used SSHFS in a corporate environment in the past and it is, in my experience, unreliable under heavy load and best suited for casual use.

If you need a heavy duty network filesystem go for NFS or CIFS (Samba). You will have to trade encryption for stability, though, unless you use NFSv4, which supports encryption.

So yes, you could use NFSv4 as a replacement which would both provide better performance under heavy load and encryption. This document at explains how to set it up.

share|improve this answer

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .