 Home |
Products |
Support |
Community |
News |
xen-users
RE: [Xen-users] disk backend performance
| To: | "'James Harper'" <james.harper@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "'Thomas Halinka'" <lists@xxxxxxxxx>, "'Stefan de Konink'" <stefan@xxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | RE: [Xen-users] disk backend performance |
| From: | "Venefax" <venefax@xxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 28 Nov 2008 22:00:41 -0500 |
| Cc: | 'Xen Users' <xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, 'Guillaume' <guillaume.chardin@xxxxxxxxx> |
| Delivery-date: | Fri, 28 Nov 2008 19:01:29 -0800 |
| Dkim-signature: | v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:from:to:cc:references :in-reply-to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:x-mailer:thread-index:content-language; bh=pM6tn0u3nt7QZVbqk0WDkpi4nmd/W/4ZjTN01wWioCE=; b=aFRMsf5spLrHhlyJotjzqhJQvNQG8qYoNpt/RiUiMOZE+ueNZZ4Fpp/M9CjlhB+fbM POMiiUvG6kIqspetzFoX9vBj2Rzcn1s69jR0M8Jo/sxxcFhJq9E7p8Q2fQeaeDffkf/F be+7aG5Z00frAJEBbWeaTZCJzZVyNlh1L5Ljk= |
| Domainkey-signature: | a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:cc:references:in-reply-to:subject:date:message-id :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-mailer :thread-index:content-language; b=ts9mVHJ+IJPb28QRx+xdLDuXWxgm4GDVf8VvyVpuW+U2K08zCtN327/QqnzbT8scnh /Ke7tCoziR7J8rdROTJs//AHXQhUduVHQD5KGHdKKaMfe9SKxSF0Y2lGP+xxdNFDMzVM 3A6zj9kwwK/NHtrDhg/3h0Lrxlbile7G730QM= |
| Envelope-to: | www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <AEC6C66638C05B468B556EA548C1A77D0154FDC6@trantor> |
| 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: | <20081128105334.I95069-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1227878219.25974.3.camel@ubu32> <AEC6C66638C05B468B556EA548C1A77D0154FDC6@trantor> |
| Sender: | xen-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| Thread-index: | AclRW8Uo8ye8bC2USzaEUJFZ8pSNcwAccLXQAAA+hxA= |
So: over a dedicated cable with jumbo frames it is actually smarter to use ISCSI than AOE? Is that your conclusion? -----Original Message----- From: xen-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:xen-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of James Harper Sent: Friday, November 28, 2008 9:56 PM To: Thomas Halinka; Stefan de Konink Cc: Xen Users; Guillaume Subject: RE: [Xen-users] disk backend performance > > > > iSCSI + pvSCSI seems to be optimal I guess. > > iSCSI is pretty slow, because of all the tcp-ip overhead. Try AoE since > its Layer 2 (Ethernet) > If you implement iSCSI in software then the overhead could matter. If it's implemented in hardware though (eg an iSCSI HBA) then the processing overhead becomes negligible. With jumbo frames, the IP+TCP header overhead (40 bytes) is also negligible. James _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | RE: [Xen-users] disk backend performance, James Harper |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | RE: [Xen-users] disk backend performance, James Harper |
| Previous by Thread: | RE: [Xen-users] disk backend performance, James Harper |
| Next by Thread: | RE: [Xen-users] disk backend performance, James Harper |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |
