Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 20 Oct 2014 07:34:17 -0500
From:      Mark Felder <feld@FreeBSD.org>
To:        freebsd-xen@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: disk loss
Message-ID:  <1413808457.2828604.181041145.4121AB54@webmail.messagingengine.com>
In-Reply-To: <65CC3330-E22F-4253-918E-72CA9B004A81@sarenet.es>
References:  <000001cfe3ca$8d242950$a76c7bf0$@ezwind.net> <5436CF13.4080509@citrix.com> <000101cfe3f1$91407da0$b3c178e0$@ezwind.net> <65CC3330-E22F-4253-918E-72CA9B004A81@sarenet.es>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help


On Mon, Oct 20, 2014, at 02:09, Egoitz Aurrekoetxea wrote:
> Good morning,
>=20
> I would recommend you using NFS instead of iSCSI. It=E2=80=99s far more b=
etter to
> handle the connection to disk arrays (the FreeNAS in this situation)
> through a mature and stable protocol like NFS
> and not something manipulating blocks directly. I would advise you to
> rely the responsibility of serving the SR to NFS.=20
>=20

You can't have redundant paths with NFS (in FreeBSD), though. I'm not so
sure everyone would agree that NFS is mature and stable, either :-)

My personal experience with building a Xen+FreeBSD cluster concluded
that NFS was far too slow and unreliable, and a properly configured
iSCSI with multiple paths and proper alignment was extremely fast.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1413808457.2828604.181041145.4121AB54>