Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- computing:storage:iscsi_vs_nfs [2015/08/09 20:30]
gcooper
+++ computing:storage:iscsi_vs_nfs [2017/06/07 11:37] (current)
gcooper
@@ Line 7: / Line 7: @@
 The common wisdom is that **iSCSI is faster than NFS** and **NFS is easier to manage than iSCSI**.
-<note important>By default, **iSCSI writes are async** and **NFS writes are sync**.  This goes a long way towards explaining the common impression that iSCSI (block storage) is faster than NFS (file storage).</note>
+<note important>By default, **iSCSI writes are async** (writeback cache enabled) and **NFS writes are sync**.  This goes a long way towards explaining the common impression that iSCSI (block storage) is faster than NFS (file storage).</note>
-<note tip>With ZFS storage servers, with an iSCSI setup with VM's, setting ''sync=always'' is the correct way to go.</note>
+<note tip>With ZFS storage servers, with an iSCSI setup with VM's, setting ''sync=always'' is the correct way to go for data integrity, but it may be slower.</note>
 <note tip>With ZFS storage servers, you should implement a fast SSD (or better) SLOG device (per pool) which significantly speeds up sync writes.</note>
@@ Line 38: / Line 38: @@
     * Higher availabilty
     * Potentially fully redundant storage networking
   * NFS
+    * No internal HA networking
+    * Some true experts don't recommend using NFS over bonded NICs
+      * Use 10GbE for speed
+    * Some do
+    * **More research needed on resilient NFS networking**

Virtual Architects Support Wiki

User Tools

Site Tools

Differences

Page Tools