Confused over CIFS

Derek Broughton derek at
Mon Jan 12 02:01:15 UTC 2009

Preston Kutzner wrote:

> On Jan 10, 2009, at 8:23 PM, Matthew Flaschen wrote:
>>> Part way through it got very slow -- and I mean very slow!!!
>> SMB is not really designed to transfer huge amounts of data.  It's
>> better to use rsync for that (there are Windows rsync servers), as
>> you'll get better compression.
> Just out of curiosity, what is your reasoning that SMB is not designed
> for transferring huge amounts of data?  SMB/CIFS is the file sharing
> protocol Microsoft uses in its Windows operating system.  It is
> designed, in a sense, as Microsoft's alternative to NFS.  If it wasn't
> meant for large transfers of data, it wouldn't be the primary protocol
> for file-sharing in Microsoft solutions.

I really don't see how that follows.  It is basically nothing more than 
patches on patches since the original LAN Manager of the 80s, and it's 
entirely possible (though I'm not in a position to say with authority) that 
it _isn't_ reliable for large data transfers.  What I can say for certain is 
that large data transfers overs SMB seem to stall with regularity when I 

> sudo mount -t cifs //<windows_machine>/<share> /<mount>/<point> -o
> username=*****,password=*****
Or better use "credentials=/path/to/file" to give username/password for 
repeatable mounts.

More information about the ubuntu-users mailing list