Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[tingtong5]

Hi,

I would like to try jriver 21 and see how it works as a media player (mainly movies) for me. However my movie library is on linux and I would like to use NFS to access these files.

I know there is a linux version of JRiver but I would like to use Smooth Video Project as well, so for the moment I am bound to use windows.

I do not see any nfs client in jriver , is this correct?

Is there any window nfs client that could be recommended?

Best regards,

Ronald

[Hendrik]

Media Center can access any path that Windows can access, but nothing else. So as you guessed, you would need a Windows NFS Client and map the shares as a drive.

[JimH]

Or serve the files from Linux by using Samba on Linux.

[millst]

If you have ultimate/enterprise edition, Windows comes with an NFS client. It's not installed by default so you'll have to enable it through programs and features.

I went the Samba/CIFS route with my NAS. It works out of the box for most OS. It doesn't seem worth the effort to install/configure/maintain additional software for a slight performance boost.

-tm

[tingtong5]

Thanks for the answers and suggestions! :-)

I was not aware of NFS client being already in some windows editions.

I want to use NFS because of performance and reliability.

Ronald

[blgentry]

I
I want to use NFS because of performance and reliability.

Someone will correct me if I'm wrong I'm sure:

1.  NFS add ons to windows are generally a pain to set up.  In the past they were also not exactly reliable.  Generally speaking, ALL windows file system add ons are less stable than the built in stuff.
2.  NFS performance is close to that of CIFS.  Close enough that you wouldn't notice except in very high transfer rate applications.
3.  Streaming audio and video are not high transfer rate applications.  They are rather low compared to typical network speeds.
4.  I personally see no reason to run NFS on a modern Linux system that will talk to windows or Mac clients.  It seems burdensome in fact.

Just use Samba, set up your shares, and be happy.

This from someone who has quite a bit of background in Unix systems.  I installed my first Linux system in 1994 from (52) 3.5" floppy disks, with Linux kernel version 0.97 .    NFS has always been a little weird under Linux and always requires it's own special setup.

Brian.

[mwillems]

Just use Samba, set up your shares, and be happy.

This.  

If your server has even a modern celeron in it (much less a core processor) Samba shares can easily saturate a gigabit link with fairly low CPU load, and have been quite reliable for several years now.  I ran a dual core celeron on my file server for a year, and samba ran as fast as the network would allow with relatively low CPU load. I've since replaced it with a core processor, and with an i3 or an i5 on your server you'd probably never even notice the difference in CPU load between SMB and NFS (and either would easily saturate a high speed link).

In a home use scenario, the performance issue is only relevant on older or very low-powered NAS hardware (or SoC's like the raspberry pi); even many modern NAS devices have enough horsepower that it shouldn't be an issue. I've also read that in some configurations Samba can actually even be slightly faster now (with windows clients in particular depending on the NFS client)

[millst]

I'd like to note that there is likely a significant performance difference between the two, regardless of processor capability, in regard to random reads/writes. If you plan on application loads hitting your network server, then it would likely make sense to deal with the extra headaches.

Having said that, this is the JRiver forum and the OP indicated that media access is the primary use. That's sequential access and at low rates so it doesn't make sense. Just go with Samba.

-tm