Hi there Firstly - do you mean NFS (as in your subject) or iSCSI (as in your message body)?
NFS is all but impossible to load balance due to the ephemeral nature of several parts of the protocol. iSCSI, being based on TCP and using well-known and defined ports, should be fairly easy - however I don't see any benefit at all in load balancing several iSCSI targets (servers) back to one initiator (client). Because iSCSI is a connected protocol - ie. there are very long-lived sessions at play - then you'd only ever see four sessions on your director (when correctly configured, of course); this would correspond to four mounted LUNs (devices) on your client. At this point, how your application accesses the data on these LUNs (which you say is identical...) is entirely up to you. I can see that, for example, using a gigabit ethernet network you move the bottleneck back to the disks on each server, so combining four would allow you some benefit - however, do you know what your actual maximum throughput of one target/initiator pairing is? It's an interesting idea but I'm not sure that LVS is the way to do it. If you really need the throughput, why not just mount the 4 LUNs without any intervening hardware and see how it goes from there? Graeme _______________________________________________ LinuxVirtualServer.org mailing list - [email protected] Send requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or go to http://lists.graemef.net/mailman/listinfo/lvs-users
