So far, I was using Samba to share the files stored on my D-Link DNS-323. However, people tend to say that NFS is quicker than Samba. So let’s benchmark those two protocols and figure out which one is actually quicker.

First of all, here is my configuration:

I used IOzone to benchmark these protocols from the Raspberry Pi. You can find the package for Arch Linux ARM on one of my previous post.

I first mounted the Samba and NFS share drives in the two respective folders /mnt/storage_smb and /mnt/storage_nfs.

I then ran the following commands (not at the same time):

iozone -RazcR -U /mnt/storage_smb -f /mnt/storage_smb/testfile -b smb_excel_output.xls
iozone -RazcR -U /mnt/storage_nfs -f /mnt/storage_nfs/testfile -b nfs_excel_output.xls

You can download the output files here and here.

Or, you can simply have a look at a summary of these two files in the following table which basically compare the average speed (in Kbytes per second) for both Samba and NFS:

As you can see, it looks like NFS is quicker for read operations but slower for write operations than Samba. But please remember that this is true for this very specific configuration ; It could be completely different for another one.

In conclusion, I personally decided to use both Samba and NFS depending of what I need. If I need a read only access to my data, I use NFS. However, if I need to write data, I use Samba.

NB: Another reason why I didn’t completely stop using Samba is because symbolic links don’t work with NFS. Instead, you need to use binding (mounting a folder inside another folder), but this is kind of incompatible with my use of rsync to backup my data. 🙁