Ask Different is a question and answer site for power users of Apple hardware and software. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I want to do Time Machine backups to an ubuntu server. It is a hosted remote machine, not in my LAN.

So far, I have found two approaches to realize the connection between the computer and the backup server: netatalk or NFS. Question is: which of these approaches would deliver higher transfer speed?

I will communicate with the ubuntu server within a ssh tunnel.

share|improve this question

NFS is known for higher performance than AFP or SMB; it is also a native protocol for unix based operating systems therefore it should be easier to setup.

share|improve this answer
ANy figures on this - also setting up smb or AFS is as easy now, all 3 are network protocols none, NFS was first written on a Unix but no reason why it is easier to setup – Mark Mar 10 '13 at 23:02
Please have a look at this: – Ninetou Mar 10 '13 at 23:10
Put the info in the answer then - not just a link especially not in comments and that does not support your answer it says -In my opinion, AFP is the clear winner; it's cached much better by an OS X client, with significantly better read performance even if it does have to cross the network. – Mark Mar 10 '13 at 23:13
ALso how does this affect Time Machine, I don't think disk access is the only possible speed difference here – Mark Mar 10 '13 at 23:14
I am now fighting with apple talk, see:…, I wonder whether NFS is not a better solution. There is a bug in NFS client of MacOS according to this discussion:… . Maybe, it is not so bad. – Skarab Mar 10 '13 at 23:18

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.