The Natural Philosopher  wrote:
> On 17/02/2021 12:39, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> > On Wed, 17 Feb 2021 11:54:57 +0000
> > Chris Green  wrote:
> >
> >> I use sshfs all the time, since I have ssh set up to connect to every
> >> system I'm interested in it's actually easier to use sshfs than setting
> >> up nfs.
> >
> >       Apart from anything else sshfs doesn't require admin access to the
> > server. IME though the latency in a remote FS mount either by NFS over VPN
> > or sshfs over anything can be painful compared to using the command line
> > and tmux over an ssh connection to a box or VM that's in the data centre
> > where everything else is.
> >
> Well that again depends on your network speed. I now have a minimum
> speed of 10Mbps up and that's as good as the coaxial ethernet NFS was
> designed for
>
> But the huge advantage for ME is that NFS mounted remote filesystems
> appear just like local ones. Its all nicely integrated
>
So do sshfs mounted ones.

> Sure I use ssh for some stuff. But its nice to click on a directory and
> open a remote server data area
>
> I dabbled with sshfs but for some reason I abandoned it in favour of NFS
>
> I cant remember why....
>
No, I can't see why.  If you have ssh configured to connect to a
server then mounting its files using sshfs 'just works' with no
further configuration at either end.

--
Chris Green
·

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05