Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757397AbYBEIip (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Feb 2008 03:38:45 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756074AbYBEIif (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Feb 2008 03:38:35 -0500 Received: from wx-out-0506.google.com ([66.249.82.229]:35462 "EHLO wx-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755517AbYBEIie (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Feb 2008 03:38:34 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=jqChyTdIiyDMw378iAT78xk1O3AZriB6NeT2XV6QEd+MYY1pchA3tlZv7hVKVy9JjmIrKXAIf905q5toy6xEdm1sm7Pu3NNhcPPmBgxXwY4xBak+iyJ9Cj9kz87UxyyILd9j05bFOs0JMnZSDOpEdvMKJ7r1sN4sya9f4UQbUhQ= Message-ID: Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2008 09:38:32 +0100 From: "Bart Van Assche" To: "Jeff Garzik" Subject: Re: Integration of SCST in the mainstream Linux kernel Cc: "Linus Torvalds" , "J. Bruce Fields" , "Nicholas A. Bellinger" , "James Bottomley" , "Vladislav Bolkhovitin" , "Andrew Morton" , "FUJITA Tomonori" , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, scst-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, "Linux Kernel Mailing List" , "Mike Christie" In-Reply-To: <47A7986B.1070206@garzik.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <47A05CBD.5050803@vlnb.net> <1202144767.3096.38.camel@localhost.localdomain> <47A7488B.4080000@vlnb.net> <1202145901.3096.49.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1202151989.11265.576.camel@haakon2.linux-iscsi.org> <20080204210121.GF18682@fieldses.org> <47A7986B.1070206@garzik.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1245 Lines: 25 On Feb 4, 2008 11:57 PM, Jeff Garzik wrote: > Networked block devices are attractive because the concepts and > implementation are more simple than networked filesystems... but usually > you want to run some sort of filesystem on top. At that point you might > as well run NFS or [gfs|ocfs|flavor-of-the-week], and ditch your > networked block device (and associated complexity). Running a filesystem on top of iSCSI results in better performance than NFS, especially if the NFS client conforms to the NFS standard (=synchronous writes). By searching the web search for the keywords NFS, iSCSI and performance I found the following (6 years old) document: http://www.technomagesinc.com/papers/ip_paper.html. A quote from the conclusion: Our results, generated by running some of industry standard benchmarks, show that iSCSI significantly outperforms NFS for situations when performing streaming, database like accesses and small file transactions. Bart Van Assche. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/