On Thu, 2006-02-16 at 14:03 -0500, Ming Zhang wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-02-16 at 10:18 -0800, Brad Dameron wrote:
> > On Wed, 2006-02-15 at 21:24 -0500, Ming Zhang wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2006-02-06 at 12:05 -0800, Brad Dameron wrote:
> > > > > > I first did cross-over cables from the initiators to the target
> > > > ports so
> > > > > > each one had a 1Gb connection. This was definitely the faster way.
> > > > I saw
> > > > > > max of about 70MB/sec reads/writes with both doing simultaneous
> > > > test's.
> > >
> > > what u mean "simultaneous test's"? my feeling is that you could get
> > > better performance with your nice HW.
> > >
> > > Ming
> > >
> >
> > Simultaneous as in reading/writing at the same time to the same iSCSI
> > target. I also tried tests where one read and the other wrote. I did
>
> same target but different LUs right? are these LU in same RAID or
> different RAIDs?
No. Same target and same LU. I am trying to use the iSCSI target as a
NFS replacement. Doing shared storage. It works. And appeared to be a
little faster than my NFS server's. Which are pretty beefy. But it
didn't seem to be enough difference to change to it. I did not test with
more than 2 servers. It would of been nice to be able to see how much
better it would of handled say 4 server's accessing the same data.
Brad Dameron
SeaTab Software
www.seatab.com
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files
for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=103432&bid=230486&dat=121642
|
