<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN"> <HTML> <HEAD> <META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"> <META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 5.5.2658.2"> <TITLE>RE: [Linux-cluster] Low cost storage for clusters</TITLE> </HEAD> <BODY> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED > I'm happy enough that iSCSI is acceptable, I don't think I > will be able > to justify a full fibre-channel SAN. Certainly I'd expect it to do as > well as straight SCSI320 given that it has 3x the raw bandwidth (even > accounting for the TCPIP overhead). use Jumbo frames and thruput might be much better. Then again I don't know how iSCSI generates packets. I hope it's not 1 packet per disk block which is typically 512bytes. presumably how many disk blocks / packet is a (auto-)tunable parameter. switch price matters. But some of the cheepies claim features that the big-names charge 10x as much for which doesn't make sense. I never pay the Cisco tax unless there is a gun to my head. </BODY> </HTML>