This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


Re: [Xen-users] disk backend performance

To: Thomas Halinka <lists@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-users] disk backend performance
From: Stefan de Konink <stefan@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2008 16:22:48 +0100 (CET)
Cc: Guillaume <guillaume.chardin@xxxxxxxxx>, Xen Users <xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Stefan de Konink <stefan@xxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Fri, 28 Nov 2008 07:23:28 -0800
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <1227885339.25974.34.camel@ubu32>
List-help: <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen user discussion <xen-users.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-users@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-users>, <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-users>, <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender: xen-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Fri, 28 Nov 2008, Thomas Halinka wrote:

> i do not need any benchmarks. i measured that iscsi could saturate a
> GB-Link with about 55-60% - AoE was about 80-85% at less CPU-Usage!

My benchmarks for iSCSI vs NFS performance tests both saturate the links
10GE ->  1GE, while the first has a bit better < 10% performance.

> Why is FC faster than iSCSI? Ah, it s because of the protocol.


> >  and preferably stability comparisons.
> open-iscsi has no stable releases yet. aoetools do have. There are also
> many users complaining about iscsi-kernel-issues....

...there is more than open-iscsi, in targets and initiators. (+ OS'es)


Xen-users mailing list