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: Stefan de Konink <stefan@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-users] disk backend performance
From: Ross Walker <rswwalker@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2008 20:45:45 -0500
Cc: Xen Users <xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Stefan Bauer <stefan.bauer@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Fri, 28 Nov 2008 17:46:43 -0800
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:references:message-id:from:to :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-mailer :mime-version:subject:date:cc; bh=19cZLtC+jZwR6YFIHYFB/GZ6rQbX4FMD0ENGxO/3gS8=; b=bNwfqTvUEUUAzS3sDWuaQfMu9XZCvHzWyDx9d1Y3eTBJwkxdwUnyrHo5kdWgD5LT82 Go3VAWaLWd5GYslOSH0jbvidyXK2iE59/4GgU4zJ2USB66WCB4raviBxNfFeTu6xjxXZ sqxw8gYNPq225bSKXesRP1o3tm98cooI5gJ/w=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=references:message-id:from:to:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:x-mailer:mime-version:subject:date:cc; b=FkUoTPo+9lbo3mCm2odPOso1aRXOtLqP9J0xEn05Y0O9wbOIrn81AFjWfcfRwkeJJT G86/mYx6Hm2Maa397J97VofQr/QRUh5gl/FWRtz2l5b6jfHEOGQChPtRdW/KwLxhfFm5 Vfmd7d0rTGg/CREoTaLnNwuSsOO5Y6G2FArco=
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <49307692.3010209@xxxxxxxxx>
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>
References: <20081128161831.H27234-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <49301783.2070107@xxxxxxxxxxx> <49307692.3010209@xxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Nov 28, 2008, at 5:54 PM, Stefan de Konink <stefan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Stefan Bauer wrote:
Stefan de Konink schrieb:
My benchmarks for iSCSI vs NFS performance tests both saturate the links
10GE ->  1GE, while the first has a bit better < 10% performance.
Don't compare apples/oranges. iSCSI is a transport protocol and has
nothing todo with application layer stuff like NFS.

It was all bonnied ;) So I had a test with native iSCSI connectors (non-pv) and NFS (tap:aio). Clearly if both saturizes my links, and tap:aio takes more memory, iscsi is my winner.

(The main reason why I prefer layer 3, because I can use different subnets on the same target)

There are many other reasons to pick iSCSI over AoE such as error recovery, error detection, transmission reliability, disk sharing via reserve/release or persistent reservations, different target types other than random access disk storage such as virtual/real tape drives, virtual/real optical drives and other SCSI based devices.

If you want cheap simple local storage that emulates SATA then AoE should fit the bill.


Xen-users mailing list