[rhelv6-list] Your opinion regarding NFS vs. iSCSI

[Grzegorz Witkowski]

It is easy and simple to build fully redundant iscsi network which will
deliver and cost much less than FC. Also troubleshooting is pretty easy.
iSCSI can be a really good choice if the design is right.
There are many factors involved. You cannot simply ask "iscsi or fc?"
On Apr 30, 2012 4:01 p.m., "Jussi Silvennoinen" <
jussi_rhel6 at silvennoinen.net> wrote:

> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> I'm going to plan the setup of a database-server (MySQL) and now a
>>>> discussion started about
>>>> how the storage should be connected. Some favour iSCSI,
>>>>
>>> others NFS (V4).
>>>
>>>>
>>>> What's your opinion? Where are advantages / disadvantages?
>>>>
>>> Which solution
>>>
>>>> would promise
>>>> most performance?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Curious, SAN is not in your list at all. Why?
>>> How important is your service availability to you?
>>>
>>
>> Hi Jussi,
>>
>> it's also in discussion :) And sure, the service IS important, database
>> will be for mailbox-servers (Zarafa).
>>
>> Currently we're focusing on iSCSI vs. NFS as we don't have FC-equipment
>> but already have 10Gbit ethernet..
>>
>
> I've gotten in to my flame retardant gear so here goes.
>
> Ethernet ís single fabric meaning a single admin error or unexpected end
> result of plugging new gear to it can bring the whole shebang down.
> Post-failure less than joyful consistency check marathon is sure to follow.
>
> For me, that is unacceptable. I'd rather be enjoying my beer at the local
> pub instead. FC SAN being multi-fabric, you have to try really hard to
> break everything.
>
> Whatever the transport technology is based on, ethernet, FC or snails on
> steroids, if it has multiple independent fabrics, I'm willing to listen.
> Otherwise, I'll pass.
>
> I really don't see any need or use for FCoE. I do like the idea of a
> single communications channel (redundant) but FCoE is a poor excuse for a
> solution towards that. iSCSI is much simpler protocol but suffers the same
> single fabric shortcoming.
>
> Perhaps there are ways out there to do ethernet-based blockstorage
> reliably that other list members know about, I'd certainly want to know
> about them.
>
>
>
> --
>
>  Jussi
> _______________________________________________
> rhelv6-list mailing list
> rhelv6-list at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhelv6-list
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/rhelv6-list/attachments/20120430/26fdbf49/attachment.htm>