@jonathak NFS is about 3-5 times slower then native speed, that is why http://docker-sync.io is not using NFS at all - a proper sync is used. One other problem with NFS is the permission issue (uid/gid)
@barat Using a sync solution ( 2 way ) like unison, docker-sync provides native performance, so as there would be no share at all. You will be back to ~1s on page load with it
This makes a difference esp. with a lot of PHP based projects, since NFS becomes even worse with reading a lot of smaller files, which PHP frameworks like Symfony or Drupal tend to have ( out of the PHP DNA).
It also seem to have a big impact on bigger Java-Frameworks, when compiling happens.
Also projects with a huge NPM dependency tree (which gets this way very fast…) tend to be very slow with NFS. It seems like NFS degrades very fast with the number of files.
I do not understand why people really wait for a solution in docker for mac. Folder-Sharing performance is a huge topic, neither Oracle nor VMware are able to cope with it on a level, where it would by any means suite development.
That said, are you really believing Docker can at any level compete with a company which involves experts on paravirtualization ONLY?
The reasons why things gone silent here is, because Docker already knows, they will not be able to get anything big happen in this. They are not able to provide 1/50 of the ressources VMware dedicates to their solution like Fusion.
I see myself, there are a lot of suggestions in my writing, but lets say, there are some facts and odds to cover this one up.
That said, people stop complaining here again and again. Either pick a different solution then d4m, pick a workarround like a NFS based one or a docker-sync like, or move to linux.