On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 2:56 AM, Jason<wheelz311 at hotmail.com> wrote: > Well, I knew a guy who was involved in a project to do just that for a > production environment. ?Basically they abandoned using that because there > was a huge performance hit using ZFS over NFS. ?I didn?t get the specifics > but his group is usually pretty sharp. ?I?ll have to check back with him. ?So > mainly just to avoid that, but also VMware tends to roll out storage features > on NFS last after fibre and iSCSI.
ZFS/NFS performance is a well studied problem. ZFS takes data integrity seriously and any request to flush to disk would do exactly that. NFS's commit requires all data written to disk guarantee. When NFS is layered over ZFS every commit is thus an expensive operation. http://blogs.sun.com/roch/entry/nfs_and_zfs_a_fine There are ways to workaround this or design around this. iSCSI will not suffer from this problem. cheers Binu > *sorry if this is duplicate... Learning the workings of this discussion forum > as well* > -- > This message posted from opensolaris.org > _______________________________________________ > ha-clusters-discuss mailing list > ha-clusters-discuss at opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/ha-clusters-discuss >