Re: [Users] Experience with low cost NFS-Storage as VM-Storage?
On Thu, 2014-01-09 at 07:10 +0000, Markus Stockhausen wrote:
> Von: users-bounces(a)ovirt.org [users-bounces(a)ovirt.org]" im
Auftrag von "squadra [squadra(a)gmail.com]
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 8. Januar 2014 17:15
> An: users(a)ovirt.org
> Betreff: Re: [Users] Experience with low cost NFS-Storage as VM-Storage?
>
> better go for iscsi or something else... i whould avoid nfs for vm hosting
> Freebsd10 delivers kernel iscsitarget now, which works great so far. or go with
omnios to get comstar iscsi, which is a rocksolid solution
>
> Cheers,
>
> Juergen
That is usually a matter of taste and the available environment.
The minimal differences in performance usually only show up
if you drive the storage to its limits. I guess you could help Sven
better if you had some hard facts why to favour ISCSI.
Best regards.
Markus
Only technical difference I can think of is the iSCSI-level
load-balancing. With NFS you set up the network with LACP and let that
load-balance for you (and you should probably do that with iSCSI as well
but you don´t strictly have to). I think it has to do with a chance of
trying to go beyond the capacity of 1 network interface at the same
time, from one Host (higher bandwidth) that makes people try iSCSI
instead of plain NFS. I have tried that but was never able to achieve
that effect, so in our situation, there´s no difference. In comparing
them both in benchmarks, there was no performance difference at all, at
least for our storage systems that are based on FreeBSD.
/K