<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic CIFS or SMB for Sql server NAS storage? in Network Attached Storage (NAS) - Enterprise</title>
    <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/network-attached-storage-nas/cifs-or-smb-for-sql-server-nas-storage/m-p/2977155#M114</link>
    <description>I know database storage requirements are different to those of standard file servers, in terms of the way that they use files etc. &lt;BR /&gt;Does anyone know which is better for a NAS based database storage solution, SMB or CIFS? Or can offer any advice on which would be more appropriate.&lt;BR /&gt; &lt;BR /&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 20 May 2003 09:15:52 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>mark blakey</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2003-05-20T09:15:52Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>CIFS or SMB for Sql server NAS storage?</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/network-attached-storage-nas/cifs-or-smb-for-sql-server-nas-storage/m-p/2977155#M114</link>
      <description>I know database storage requirements are different to those of standard file servers, in terms of the way that they use files etc. &lt;BR /&gt;Does anyone know which is better for a NAS based database storage solution, SMB or CIFS? Or can offer any advice on which would be more appropriate.&lt;BR /&gt; &lt;BR /&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 20 May 2003 09:15:52 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/network-attached-storage-nas/cifs-or-smb-for-sql-server-nas-storage/m-p/2977155#M114</guid>
      <dc:creator>mark blakey</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2003-05-20T09:15:52Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: CIFS or SMB for Sql server NAS storage?</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/network-attached-storage-nas/cifs-or-smb-for-sql-server-nas-storage/m-p/2977156#M115</link>
      <description>Hello!&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;First of all the SMB (samba) is the same as&lt;BR /&gt;the CIFS, CIFS is the samba that hp compiled and give support for.&lt;BR /&gt;I think that better to use SMB because that's the original and they made updates and develop more that made on CIFS.&lt;BR /&gt;Also for use with microsoft and all the new OS from them the SMB made updates for quickly.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Caesar</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 14 Jun 2003 06:21:19 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/network-attached-storage-nas/cifs-or-smb-for-sql-server-nas-storage/m-p/2977156#M115</guid>
      <dc:creator>Caesar_3</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2003-06-14T06:21:19Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: CIFS or SMB for Sql server NAS storage?</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/network-attached-storage-nas/cifs-or-smb-for-sql-server-nas-storage/m-p/2977157#M116</link>
      <description>Hi,&lt;BR /&gt;In general, it is not recommend to use NAS storage for databases. The only excepion I know is NetApp filers.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;A href="http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/3162.html" target="_blank"&gt;http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/3162.html&lt;/A&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 14 Jun 2003 11:52:47 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/network-attached-storage-nas/cifs-or-smb-for-sql-server-nas-storage/m-p/2977157#M116</guid>
      <dc:creator>Leif Halvarsson_2</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2003-06-14T11:52:47Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: CIFS or SMB for Sql server NAS storage?</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/network-attached-storage-nas/cifs-or-smb-for-sql-server-nas-storage/m-p/2977158#M117</link>
      <description>I wouldn't say NetApp filers are "recommended" for database storage... except by NetApps, who has no other storage product!&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Generally, you can use NAS for databases, but it's not recommended for a variety of reasons - performance, security, reliability, etc.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;However, in the few cases where you don't care about such items, NAS can be used and be useful. (it does work with databases)&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;The previous poster was pretty much correct in saying that SMB (Server Message Blocks) and CIFS (Common Internet File System) are the same thing - SMB is the underlying protocol of CIFS.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Perhaps you meant NFS and CIFS/SMB.  NFS is the native UNIX network filesystem, and CIFS/SMB the equivelent Windows technology.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Which would be better for you depends on what OS (UNIX or Windows) you are working with. &lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Always go with the native protocol. In your case, since you say this is SQL Server, I guess you're on Windows....&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;For NAS heads, I would suggest the e7000, b3000 or b2000. See &lt;A href="http://h18006.www1.hp.com/storage/networkattached.html" target="_blank"&gt;http://h18006.www1.hp.com/storage/networkattached.html&lt;/A&gt; for details on these products.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Good luck,&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Vince</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 15 Jun 2003 15:50:37 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/network-attached-storage-nas/cifs-or-smb-for-sql-server-nas-storage/m-p/2977158#M117</guid>
      <dc:creator>Vincent Fleming</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2003-06-15T15:50:37Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

