|   | 
      | 
  
  
      | 
      | 
  
 
     | 
    | 
  
  
     | 
    | 
  
  
    |   | 
      | 
  
  
    | 
         
xen-users
Re: [Xen-users] disk backend performance
 
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.
just my 5 cent
-- 
stefan
_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
 
 |   
 
| <Prev in Thread] | 
Current Thread | 
[Next in Thread>
 |  
- RE: [Xen-users] disk backend performance, (continued)
 
- RE: [Xen-users] disk backend performance, Joseph L. Casale
 - RE: [Xen-users] disk backend performance, Venefax
 - RE: [Xen-users] disk backend performance, Thomas Halinka
 
- RE: [Xen-users] disk backend performance, Joseph L. Casale
 - RE: [Xen-users] disk backend performance, Thomas Halinka
 
- RE: [Xen-users] disk backend performance, Venefax
 
- Re: [Xen-users] disk backend performance,
Stefan Bauer <=
 - Re: [Xen-users] disk backend performance, Stefan de Konink
 - Re: [Xen-users] disk backend performance, Ross Walker
 
- RE: [Xen-users] disk backend performance, James Harper
 - RE: [Xen-users] disk backend performance, Venefax
 - RE: [Xen-users] disk backend performance, James Harper
 - RE: [Xen-users] disk backend performance, Thomas Halinka
 
 
 |  
  
 | 
    | 
  
  
    |   | 
    |