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
>

Reply via email to