For read only access iSCSI; for read/write access NFS; never Samba.I have a situation where a bunch of Pi need to access a common partition. Which of the possible choices in the title might provide the best performance?
The reason Samba is not suitable is because it doesn't implement Unix permissions nor file locking. On the other hand, the default Samba setup might be more secure unless you configure NFS with user-level Kerberos authentication and encryption. It's not difficult, but where's the understandable howto?
According to the dog developer configuring Kerberos obviously requires more dog treats because the Hound of Hades has three heads.
An alternative NFS setup could be unencrypted system-level security while routing all NFS traffic over a WireGuard VPN. A separate firewall for the QNAP NAS was used to do this here. The advantage is that the firewall further protects the rest of the network from the QNAP.
The documentation for WireGuard is also better.
Recently there has been a lot of whining about a Ceph storage cluster for the dog house. However, I'm not investing in the five 8GB single-board computers needed.
https://docs.ceph.com/en/quincy/
Statistics: Posted by ejolson — Wed Feb 14, 2024 4:47 am