@Dashrender said in Domain Planning: Network shares or ,..:
@dafyre said in Domain Planning: Network shares or ,..:
@notverypunny said in Domain Planning: Network shares or ,..:
Does NC allow exposure of their "file shares" as smb? If you have users that can't / don't want to use a browser-based access they can always mount it in windows explorer via webdav. Alfresco allows (allowed?) access via both, but the last time I played with it the performance was meh, which I attributed to it being built on java...
You can mount NextCloud into a drive letter or folder using WebDav.
The question does become the aforementioned performance issue (if there is one).
I wonder how file locks are handled when using WebDav?
There are a few topics elsewhere here where file locking and cloud hosting were discussed. You do have to give up what we have all come to appreciate in file locking. Here is a response in one of those other topics I spoke about:
@scottalanmiller said in file sharing in the 21st century:
@Donahue said in file sharing in the 21st century:
I am aware of that. It's online locking that I am after. Though, I will concede that any locking scheme has to plan for both online and offline. I like sync because of local performance and offline availability, but it really feels like it is best for non shared files. When you add multiple users into the mix, almost everything goes out the window, especially when and if they go offline.
Everything is best for non-shared files 🙂
SMB shines at "always online, always nearly local" files because it handles offline so poorly. It's a balance. To handle offline or very distant (e.g. high latency) networks well, you have to sacrifice locking.
