Valerio wrote:
Has anyone built an iSCSI SAN on 10Gbe copper and willing to share
read/write performance numbers?
This (performance) is dependent upon many things. Back end storage,
size/distribution of reads/writes, etc.
Do you have particular workloads you are interested in? Or just raw
Boaz Harrosh wrote:
We reimaged the server to OpenSuse, same hardware and configs
otherwise, and since then we are getting about half, or 1.2 to 1.3
Gbit per NIC, or 2.5 to 3.0 Gbit total IO throughput, but we've not
had any iscsi connection errors.
What are other people seeing? Doesn't need t
Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 08:52:42AM -0400, Joe Landman wrote:
An Oneironaut wrote:
Hey all. Could anyone suggest a good NAS that has about 2 to 6TB of
storage which is under 4k? its hard to find out whether these people
have tested with open-iscsi or not. So I was
An Oneironaut wrote:
Hey all. Could anyone suggest a good NAS that has about 2 to 6TB of
storage which is under 4k? its hard to find out whether these people
have tested with open-iscsi or not. So I was hoping some of you out
there who had used a storage device within this range would have som
Bart Van Assche wrote:
"1,030,000 IOPS over a single 10 Gb Ethernet link"
This is less than 1us per IOP. Interesting. Their hardware may not
actually support this. 10GbE typically is 7-10us, though ConnectX and some
others get down to 2ish.
Which I/O depth has been used in the test ? Laten
Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
I think SFP+ 10 Gbit has 0.6usec latency.. ? 10GBase-T is 2.6 usec.
http://www.mellanox.com/pdf/whitepapers/wp_mellanox_en_Arista.pdf
They are reporting 7+ us latency. ConnectX are a bit better on latency
than the Intel NICs.
http://www.ednasia.com/article-24923-so
Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
Hello list,
Please check these news items:
http://blog.fosketts.net/2010/01/14/microsoft-intel-push-million-iscsi-iops/
http://communities.intel.com/community/openportit/server/blog/2010/01/19/100-iops-with-iscsi--thats-not-a-typo
http://www.infostor.com/index/blogs_ne
Hi folks:
We are having a problem with kernel 2.6.28 and the git repository
code (the latest semi-stable code doesn't support 2.6.28). Same
hardware, same targets, the 2.6.27 kernel can see our targets, but
2.6.28.4 can't. RHEL 5.3 on one machine Centos 5.2 on another, both
x86_64, with git c
now that the initiator works
correctly.
Is there a source RPM/tree for this target?
Joe Landman wrote:
> Hi Erez
>
> Erez Zilber wrote:
>> stgt (SCSI target) is an open-source framework for storage target
>> drivers. It supports iSCSI over iSER among other storage target
Hi Erez
Erez Zilber wrote:
> stgt (SCSI target) is an open-source framework for storage target
> drivers. It supports iSCSI over iSER among other storage target drivers.
>
> Voltaire added a git tree for stgt that will be added to OFED 1.4:
> http://www2.openfabrics.org/git/?p=~dorons/tgt.git;a=
On Feb 17, 4:57 pm, Joe Landman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> For the Centos load, this was the 5.1 kernel driver with the 865 user
> space tools.
"fixed"
I completely rebuilt/re-installed the 865 tools after removing every
trace of the previous builds (userspace a
Hi Mike
On Feb 17, 3:52 pm, Mike Christie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Joe Landman wrote:
> > Hi folks:
>
> > I have a Ubuntu 7.10 machine with a 10 GbE card connected to a
>
> What target? Is this the open solaris one?
SCST-iSCSI in a 2.6.23.14 kernel.
>
Hi folks:
I have a Ubuntu 7.10 machine with a 10 GbE card connected to a
target. Same machine running Centos 5.1 connects with no problem to
target using 865 code. Booting this machine into Ubuntu (2.6.22-14
kernel by default, though we have also verified that this fails in the
same way with
13 matches
Mail list logo
