Re: iSCSI initiator lockups
> > --VbJkn9YxBvnuCH5J > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > Content-Disposition: inline > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > In our last exciting episode, Danny Braniss (da...@cs.huji.ac.il) said: > > I guess it's time to fix this. > > danny > > Thank you very much for the pointer to the newer version; we have seen a=20 > marked improvement with none of the 30 second studdering. I appreciate > your rapid assistance! Good, can you send me the info of the target/s you are using to add to the list of supported targets? Cheers, danny ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: iSCSI initiator lockups
> > --ikeVEW9yuYc//A+q > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > Content-Disposition: inline > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > I'm running into some odd headaches regarding what looks like iSCSI initiat= > ors > going to sleep for approximately 30 seconds before returning to life and > pumping a ton of information back to the target. While this is happening, > system load climbs up alarmingly fast. Looking at tcpdumps in Wireshark, it > shows what appears to be a nearly exact 30 second delay where the initiator > stops talking to the target server, then abruptly restarts. Currently > 8 machines are talking to 2 servers with 4 targets a piece, and while its= > =20 > working, we get good throughput. Activity is moderately high, as we are=20 > using the iSCSI targets as spool disks in an email cluster. As it appears > that iscsi-target is a single-threaded process, would it be valuable to > put each target in its own process on its own port? At any rate, this is > causing serious problems on the mail processing machines. > can you send me the output of sysctl net.iscsi chears, danny ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: iSCSI support
Jeff Chen - PTT 陳龍焜 wrote: > Hi, > My company is a storage RAID system company. There is one customer ask iSCSI > solution with my production of my company with FreeBSD 6.1. But I found some > information in the Internet, the iSCSI full support on FreeBSD is 7.0. Is it > mean FreeBSD 6.1 can’t support iSCSI? > > BR, > Jeff > > > > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" There are some patches around to run it on 6.2 (maybe all of 6.x) but the performance isn't very good. I used this on 6.2 and it did work: ftp://ftp.cs.huji.ac.il/users/danny/freebsd/iscsi-2.0.92.tar.gz This looks like a more recent version (tho no guarantee it will work on 6.x): ftp://ftp.cs.huji.ac.il/users/danny/freebsd/iscsi-2.1.tar.gz ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: iSCSI support
can't be iSCSI client, but iscsi-target is userlevel app, you may run on any FreeBSD (most probably under any unix). ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: iSCSI support
Jeff Chen - PTT 陳龍焜 wrote: > Hi, > My company is a storage RAID system company. There is one customer ask iSCSI > solution with my production of my company with FreeBSD 6.1. But I found some > information in the Internet, the iSCSI full support on FreeBSD is 7.0. Is it > mean FreeBSD 6.1 can’t support iSCSI? Yes, the iSCSI initiator is in FreeBSD 7.x. Soon, FreeBSD 7.1 will be released. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
RE: iSCSI initiator
> > Please clarify these : > (1) Is iSCSI initiator not currently implemented for FreeBSD ? > (2) There is no "iSCSI target daemon" currently ? > Check this post, it has step by step instructions for 6.x: http://www.southernledger.com/blogs/ee99ee/?p=33 ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: iSCSI initiator
Please clarify these : (1) Is iSCSI initiator not currently implemented for FreeBSD ? no idea. (2) There is no "iSCSI target daemon" currently ? /usr/ports/net/iscsi-target unless you HAVE to interwork with iSCSI, use ggate. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: iSCSI initiator
Sahil Tandon wrote: * Onkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [05-16-2008]: (1) Is iSCSI initiator not currently implemented for FreeBSD ? http://www.freebsd.org/releases/7.0R/announce.html (2) There is no "iSCSI target daemon" currently ? net/iscsi-target Onkar, you may also find this helpful. http://conshell.net/wiki/index.php/User:Fostermarkd/FreeBSD/iSCSI -- Said one park ranger, 'There is considerable overlap between the intelligence of the smartest bears and the dumbest tourists.' Mark D. Foster, CISSP <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://mark.foster.cc/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: iSCSI initiator
* Onkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [05-16-2008]: > (1) Is iSCSI initiator not currently implemented for FreeBSD ? http://www.freebsd.org/releases/7.0R/announce.html > (2) There is no "iSCSI target daemon" currently ? net/iscsi-target -- Sahil Tandon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: iSCSI and multi-terabyte support?
On 10/10/07, pete wright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 10/10/07, Kurt Buff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > At my place of work, we're looking at implementing a SAN, most likely > > with iSCSI, some time next year, and likely about 5-10TBytes. > > > > I was wondering if FreeBSD could provide this on COTS hardware, but my > > googling hasn't been successful. > > > > >From my reading of this list over the past couple of years, it seems > > that both parts of the solution - iSCSI support and large disk support > > - are still problematic, but I'd like to hear more informed opinion, > > as the potential cost savings is quite large. > > > > Anyone have recent-ish experience putting something like this together? > > > > IMHO opinion I do not think FreeBSD is there...yet. ZFS is addressing > many of the enterprise filesystem features that would be needed to > implement something on this scale, and there is the iSCSI target from > NetBSD available in the ports tree. > > I think 7-RELEASE is going to be a solid foundation for building > solutions like this - but in the mean time it may be worth considering > OpenSolaris if are considering going the COTS path. > > or - you can take a look at a company like Isilon Systems > (http://www.isilon.com/) which builds very scalable filers based on > FreeBSD. I have beta tested their iSCSI implementation and it does > look good. > > HTH > -pete Thanks - being a noob at this particular part of IT, I appreciate the feedback. Kurt ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: iSCSI and multi-terabyte support?
On 10/10/07, Kurt Buff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At my place of work, we're looking at implementing a SAN, most likely > with iSCSI, some time next year, and likely about 5-10TBytes. > > I was wondering if FreeBSD could provide this on COTS hardware, but my > googling hasn't been successful. > > >From my reading of this list over the past couple of years, it seems > that both parts of the solution - iSCSI support and large disk support > - are still problematic, but I'd like to hear more informed opinion, > as the potential cost savings is quite large. > > Anyone have recent-ish experience putting something like this together? > IMHO opinion I do not think FreeBSD is there...yet. ZFS is addressing many of the enterprise filesystem features that would be needed to implement something on this scale, and there is the iSCSI target from NetBSD available in the ports tree. I think 7-RELEASE is going to be a solid foundation for building solutions like this - but in the mean time it may be worth considering OpenSolaris if are considering going the COTS path. or - you can take a look at a company like Isilon Systems (http://www.isilon.com/) which builds very scalable filers based on FreeBSD. I have beta tested their iSCSI implementation and it does look good. HTH -pete -- ~~o0OO0o~~ Pete Wright www.nycbug.org NYC's *BSD User Group ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: iSCSI
I never said it was, my rather poor example (I said I was new to iSCSI) was if a remote file system crashes, who should fsck it? The server (Target) or the client (Initiator)? --- Clearly, the initiator. It owns the filesystem. Its just a big anonymous file on the target with no relevant structure that it cares about. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: iSCSI
Marc G. Fournier wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 - --On Tuesday, January 09, 2007 12:14:15 -0500 DAve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: That was my thought as well. I have my pop toasters all mounting a NFS mail store and when NFS goes away I don't have my NFS clients doing a fsck when the mount returns. Not sure if that is important as iSCSI is all new to me, still reading up on it. Does FreeBSD do anything special to a NFS mount when it returns? 'k, maybe I'm misunderstanding things, but iSCSI != NFS I never said it was, my rather poor example (I said I was new to iSCSI) was if a remote file system crashes, who should fsck it? The server (Target) or the client (Initiator)? ... iSCSI is just removing your SCSI drives from your local server and putting them in a different location (over an ethernet connection) ... with NFS, you have one server to which multiple clients can connect ... with iSCSI, you have a one-to-one mapping of a file system on the 'target' to the server in question ... so, again, it was my understanding that stuff like an fsck is the responsibility of the server, not the target, same as if the SCSI drives were local to the server ... As I thought. However, I clearly don't know much about iSCSI, though I know more with every page I read. I will always defer to those with experience, which is why I ask (sometimes stupid) questions ;^) DAve -- Three years now I've asked Google why they don't have a logo change for Memorial Day. Why do they choose to do logos for other non-international holidays, but nothing for Veterans? Maybe they forgot who made that choice possible. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: iSCSI
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 - --On Tuesday, January 09, 2007 12:14:15 -0500 DAve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > That was my thought as well. I have my pop toasters all mounting a NFS mail > store and when NFS goes away I don't have my NFS clients doing a fsck when > the mount returns. > > Not sure if that is important as iSCSI is all new to me, still reading up on > it. Does FreeBSD do anything special to a NFS mount when it returns? 'k, maybe I'm misunderstanding things, but iSCSI != NFS ... iSCSI is just removing your SCSI drives from your local server and putting them in a different location (over an ethernet connection) ... with NFS, you have one server to which multiple clients can connect ... with iSCSI, you have a one-to-one mapping of a file system on the 'target' to the server in question ... so, again, it was my understanding that stuff like an fsck is the responsibility of the server, not the target, same as if the SCSI drives were local to the server ... - Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email . [EMAIL PROTECTED] MSN . [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yahoo . yscrappy Skype: hub.orgICQ . 7615664 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFFpDvG4QvfyHIvDvMRAhLCAKDXPvQB2ZVn3oZ42wt7su+nKmLrVgCgpyy2 UIyUtRnJy52ftxXgdoAKGT0= =AR/j -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: iSCSI
That only works if the target comes up within the 2min window that SCSI allows for. It won't wait forever. On 1/9/07, Dan Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: In the last episode (Jan 09), DAve said: > The developers response, for those who are interested. > > hi Dave, >the initiator for iSCSI will hit stable/current real soon now. > that was the good news, now for the down side: > what was missing all along was recovery from network disconnects, so > while I think I have it almost worked out, I've come across a major > flow in the iscsi design: >when the targets crashes, and comes back, there is no way > to tell the client to run an fsck. This is not a problem if the > client is mounting the iscsi partition read only. > >danny Why should the client need to do an fsck? From its point of view it should just look like the target had the iSCSI equivalent of a bus reset. It should resend any queued requests and continue. -- Dan Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: iSCSI
Dan Nelson wrote: In the last episode (Jan 09), DAve said: The developers response, for those who are interested. hi Dave, the initiator for iSCSI will hit stable/current real soon now. that was the good news, now for the down side: what was missing all along was recovery from network disconnects, so while I think I have it almost worked out, I've come across a major flow in the iscsi design: when the targets crashes, and comes back, there is no way to tell the client to run an fsck. This is not a problem if the client is mounting the iscsi partition read only. danny Why should the client need to do an fsck? From its point of view it should just look like the target had the iSCSI equivalent of a bus reset. It should resend any queued requests and continue. That was my thought as well. I have my pop toasters all mounting a NFS mail store and when NFS goes away I don't have my NFS clients doing a fsck when the mount returns. Not sure if that is important as iSCSI is all new to me, still reading up on it. Does FreeBSD do anything special to a NFS mount when it returns? Should I subscribe to the SCSI list to continue this thread? DAve -- Three years now I've asked Google why they don't have a logo change for Memorial Day. Why do they choose to do logos for other non-international holidays, but nothing for Veterans? Maybe they forgot who made that choice possible. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: iSCSI
In the last episode (Jan 09), DAve said: > The developers response, for those who are interested. > > hi Dave, > the initiator for iSCSI will hit stable/current real soon now. > that was the good news, now for the down side: > what was missing all along was recovery from network disconnects, so > while I think I have it almost worked out, I've come across a major > flow in the iscsi design: > when the targets crashes, and comes back, there is no way > to tell the client to run an fsck. This is not a problem if the > client is mounting the iscsi partition read only. > > danny Why should the client need to do an fsck? From its point of view it should just look like the target had the iSCSI equivalent of a bus reset. It should resend any queued requests and continue. -- Dan Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: iSCSI
John Nielsen wrote: On Monday 08 January 2007 14:52, DAve wrote: We are moving to SAN in the near future to resolve a host of issues. I have been looking through archives for information on FreeBSD and iSCSI without much success. We currently have 15 servers running FreeBSD and several more in the queue/on order. It is looking like FreeBSD may not provide the production level of iSCSI initiator we will require. (The iSCSI target host will be a third party vendor) I am sending a request for information to the project lead but I am also interested in knowing if anyone is currently using any iSCSI with FreeBSD and what your success failures might be. I just started using the latest iSCSI initiator[1] on my 6-STABLE desktop to access some volumes on a LeftHand Networks SAN. It's a bit lacking in polish, but it works quite well. The one big missing feature is that it doesn't handle network disconnections. No panics or anything though, and performance was what I expected. I'd be interested in what Danny tells you about the initiator's readiness for production use, but in any case you'll probably just have to do some stability and stress testing on your own. [1] ftp://ftp.cs.huji.ac.il/users/danny/freebsd/iscsi-17.5.tar.bz2 JN The developers response, for those who are interested. hi Dave, the initiator for iSCSI will hit stable/current real soon now. that was the good news, now for the down side: what was missing all along was recovery from network disconnects, so while I think I have it almost worked out, I've come across a major flow in the iscsi design: when the targets crashes, and comes back, there is no way to tell the client to run an fsck. This is not a problem if the client is mounting the iscsi partition read only. danny Thanks everyone who responded on and off list to me. DAve -- Three years now I've asked Google why they don't have a logo change for Memorial Day. Why do they choose to do logos for other non-international holidays, but nothing for Veterans? Maybe they forgot who made that choice possible. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: iSCSI
Boris Samorodov wrote: On Mon, 08 Jan 2007 14:52:06 -0500 DAve wrote: We are moving to SAN in the near future to resolve a host of issues. I have been looking through archives for information on FreeBSD and iSCSI without much success. We currently have 15 servers running FreeBSD and several more in the queue/on order. It is looking like FreeBSD may not provide the production level of iSCSI initiator we will require. (The iSCSI target host will be a third party vendor) I didn't use them myself but I'll second for hearing about them: http://ixsystems.com/storageiSCSI.php I am sending a request for information to the project lead but I am also interested in knowing if anyone is currently using any iSCSI with FreeBSD and what your success failures might be. WBR iSCSI Target and iSCSI initiator are two different animals. The above is for hosting a iSCSI system, providing a target(I believe), we need to connect to it, using an initiator. Thanks, DAve -- Three years now I've asked Google why they don't have a logo change for Memorial Day. Why do they choose to do logos for other non-international holidays, but nothing for Veterans? Maybe they forgot who made that choice possible. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: iSCSI
John Nielsen wrote: On Monday 08 January 2007 14:52, DAve wrote: We are moving to SAN in the near future to resolve a host of issues. I have been looking through archives for information on FreeBSD and iSCSI without much success. We currently have 15 servers running FreeBSD and several more in the queue/on order. It is looking like FreeBSD may not provide the production level of iSCSI initiator we will require. (The iSCSI target host will be a third party vendor) I am sending a request for information to the project lead but I am also interested in knowing if anyone is currently using any iSCSI with FreeBSD and what your success failures might be. I just started using the latest iSCSI initiator[1] on my 6-STABLE desktop to access some volumes on a LeftHand Networks SAN. It's a bit lacking in polish, but it works quite well. The one big missing feature is that it doesn't handle network disconnections. No panics or anything though, and performance was what I expected. I'd be interested in what Danny tells you about the initiator's readiness for production use, but in any case you'll probably just have to do some stability and stress testing on your own. [1] ftp://ftp.cs.huji.ac.il/users/danny/freebsd/iscsi-17.5.tar.bz2 JN Thanks for the feedback. DAve -- Three years now I've asked Google why they don't have a logo change for Memorial Day. Why do they choose to do logos for other non-international holidays, but nothing for Veterans? Maybe they forgot who made that choice possible. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: iSCSI
On Mon, 08 Jan 2007 14:52:06 -0500 DAve wrote: > We are moving to SAN in the near future to resolve a host of issues. I > have been looking through archives for information on FreeBSD and > iSCSI without much success. > We currently have 15 servers running FreeBSD and several more in the > queue/on order. It is looking like FreeBSD may not provide the > production level of iSCSI initiator we will require. (The iSCSI target > host will be a third party vendor) I didn't use them myself but I'll second for hearing about them: http://ixsystems.com/storageiSCSI.php > I am sending a request for information to the project lead but I am > also interested in knowing if anyone is currently using any iSCSI with > FreeBSD and what your success failures might be. WBR -- Boris Samorodov (bsam) Research Engineer, http://www.ipt.ru Telephone & Internet SP FreeBSD committer, http://www.FreeBSD.org The Power To Serve ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: iSCSI
On Monday 08 January 2007 14:52, DAve wrote: > We are moving to SAN in the near future to resolve a host of issues. I > have been looking through archives for information on FreeBSD and iSCSI > without much success. > > We currently have 15 servers running FreeBSD and several more in the > queue/on order. It is looking like FreeBSD may not provide the > production level of iSCSI initiator we will require. (The iSCSI target > host will be a third party vendor) > > I am sending a request for information to the project lead but I am also > interested in knowing if anyone is currently using any iSCSI with > FreeBSD and what your success failures might be. I just started using the latest iSCSI initiator[1] on my 6-STABLE desktop to access some volumes on a LeftHand Networks SAN. It's a bit lacking in polish, but it works quite well. The one big missing feature is that it doesn't handle network disconnections. No panics or anything though, and performance was what I expected. I'd be interested in what Danny tells you about the initiator's readiness for production use, but in any case you'll probably just have to do some stability and stress testing on your own. [1] ftp://ftp.cs.huji.ac.il/users/danny/freebsd/iscsi-17.5.tar.bz2 JN ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: iSCSI setup
I got bored, installed this on 5.3 with a Netapp F880. Slow isnt the word..anyone else try this with similar results? Like..max write speed is 600k/sec. On 10/23/06, freebsd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi, I'm trying to have my mailboxes put on iSCSI (NetAPP). I downloaded iscsi-17.5.tar.bz2 and have several questions: 1) is there some more documentation on this driver? 2) someone has pointed out how to specify user and password to pass to iscontrol? 3) Which is the correct way to put that source in the kernel and have it compiled? What I need to add to my kernel config file? Is there an howto specifying how to reach the final result of having my FreeBSD boot and mount then iSCSI drive to /iSCSI/myvolume? Thanks a lot ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: iSCSI support..
On Thu, Oct 12, 2006 at 08:37:27PM -0700, Jeff Mohler wrote: > Freebsd ever hope to have a stable supported iscsi layer? > > Thanks for any hints. I plan to starting testing FreeBSD 6.2 (when it is released) and iSCSI within the next few weeks. We have seattled on an HP DL360 with a Broadcom NIC talking to a NetApp. This will be our first pass at iSCSI. Should be intresting. Josef -- Josef Grosch | Another day closer to a | FreeBSD 6.1 [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Micro$oft free world | Berkeley, Ca. pgpLRYeJnNfV8.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: iSCSI support
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have 3 datacentres connected by 12 core gig fibre (only using one pair at the moment, but the fibre is there for future use) each connected directly to the others. I want a system that I can start off with one disk server in one datacentre, and then step it up to have mirrored disk servers in each of the other datacentre's which are kept up to date in real time and can take over instantaneously if one of the others fails. It must also be scalable (non destructive resizing of the system) and support both linux and FreeBSD. I am willing to wait for this, but can anyone point me in the right direction. iSCSI seems to be it, but I'm not sure. all, don't get network attached storage confused with network attached filesystem confused with clustered filesystem. if you go for fibre channel network attached storage, it dosen't matter if the host and storage array are in the same cabinet, across the room or in different data centers. if your requirement is only to have one host up at any time then it can raid1 3way mirror over the sites. of course it gets really messy when one of the links goes down and you have to decide if it really has and not just the way your testing, who becomes master and enforce it so there's no corruption (if the "down" host continues writing). you mention multiple cores and the datacenters connectected in a ring, which means you can multipath in both directions of the loop. don't know of any fc multipathing for freebsd. doing this in iscsi will be a lot cheaper. switches will be gigE with fibre uplinks to connect the sites. targets and initiators can be regular boxes with more/less/none directly attached disks, all connected via gig nics. multipathing/link failures are handled by routing daemons/protocols which already exist. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: iSCSI support
On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 07:13:45PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > anyway - for already existing iSCSI devices driver won't hurt of course, > but i'm sure nobody that understand things won't invest in such > technologies. I've been looking at iSCSI, but if someone can suggest a better alternative I'd be happy to use it, as I haven't bought anything yet. I have 3 datacentres connected by 12 core gig fibre (only using one pair at the moment, but the fibre is there for future use) each connected directly to the others. I want a system that I can start off with one disk server in one datacentre, and then step it up to have mirrored disk servers in each of the other datacentre's which are kept up to date in real time and can take over instantaneously if one of the others fails. It must also be scalable (non destructive resizing of the system) and support both linux and FreeBSD. I am willing to wait for this, but can anyone point me in the right direction. iSCSI seems to be it, but I'm not sure. -John ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: iSCSI support
affect of transfer speed for ONE process reading one file, but not multiuser system. Regardless of whether iSCSI is any good, it's a common access method for SAN devices, and from what I've been told, may be the *only* access method. So AFAIK it's SCSI over FC, SCSI over IP was next probably to eliminate expensive FC, that was "invented" first to make things more expensive. looks like politicians - first they get 1000$, then give 100$ back and say how much they gave ;) anyway - for already existing iSCSI devices driver won't hurt of course, but i'm sure nobody that understand things won't invest in such technologies. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
RE: iSCSI support
iSCSI enables block access to drives over IP. There is only so much you can do with NFS and SMB. > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:owner-freebsd- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Wojciech Puchar > Sent: November 21, 2005 6:25 PM > To: Josh Endries > Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > Subject: Re: iSCSI support > > > and growing. I'm currently looking at a Coraid AoE > > (ATA-over-Ethernet) solution since it seems to have good support for > > FreeBSD and Windows drivers in the works. On the other hand, iSCSI > > has Windows support and FreeBSD in the works. > > > stupid question: can anyone explain me the sense and adventages of iSCSI > compared to say NFS? for me it's just some more layer to take lots of $$$ > from people. > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions- > [EMAIL PROTECTED]" ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: iSCSI support
Wojciech Puchar wrote: Whole devices accessed directly can be a lot faster than NFS, since the client doesn't have to constantly ask the NFS server whether the file it's currently accessing has changed. any problem to add such option to NFS?? with iSCSI you just CAN't do it. anyway this asking isn't bandwidth intensive, while adds delays. and it may affect of transfer speed for ONE process reading one file, but not multiuser system. Regardless of whether iSCSI is any good, it's a common access method for SAN devices, and from what I've been told, may be the *only* access method. So in heterogenous (read windows dominated) environment where you want to be able to access these things, an iSCSI initiator for FreeBSD can only be a good thing. --Alex ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: iSCSI support
just a cheap PC with cheap IDE drives.. Whole devices accessed directly can be a lot faster than NFS, since the client doesn't have to constantly ask the NFS server whether the file it's currently accessing has changed. any problem to add such option to NFS?? with iSCSI you just CAN't do it. anyway this asking isn't bandwidth intensive, while adds delays. and it may affect of transfer speed for ONE process reading one file, but not multiuser system. And when a cheap IDE in one of the 100 servers in your server room goes out, you have to find the server, figure out which drives it has in it and which RAID controller it has, go to your spares cabinet and get the if company having this 100 servers (must be really huge company or really bad software using to need 100 servers) and their IT managers don't know what it where and don't know few basic unix command to localize the problem source - then here is a problem, and any kind of SAN won't fix it. the real fix is to employ someone more competent. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: iSCSI support
In the last episode (Nov 22), Wojciech Puchar said: > >>from people. > > > >ICBW but to me it seems that iSCSI is like a distributed NFS backend. You > >can > >store the data on multiple devices, in multiple forms (as long as they > >all talk iSCSI). You can also have two storage sites (geographically > >separate) connected by fibre and use those for storage. > same as NFS. while with iSCSI you have exported whole devices that can't > be really shared with ease. and 100 times more expensive of course that > just a cheap PC with cheap IDE drives.. Whole devices accessed directly can be a lot faster than NFS, since the client doesn't have to constantly ask the NFS server whether the file it's currently accessing has changed. And when a cheap IDE in one of the 100 servers in your server room goes out, you have to find the server, figure out which drives it has in it and which RAID controller it has, go to your spares cabinet and get the right spare, swap the drive, load your raid management software, and rebuild. Unless you have a hotspare in each computer, but that's quite a lot of wasted disks. With a iSCSI/FC SAN setup, you probably have a couple hotspares configured in your array already and it's rebuilt automatically. If a server needs a few more TB or storage, simply create a new LUN and make it visible to the server. If you want to set up failover (or are running an OS that has clustered filesystems), make one LUN visible to multiple machines. There's also nothing that says the disks behind the iSCSI array can't be cheap IDE drives. -- Dan Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: iSCSI support
from people. ICBW but to me it seems that iSCSI is like a distributed NFS backend. You can store the data on multiple devices, in multiple forms (as long as they all talk iSCSI). You can also have two storage sites (geographically separate) connected by fibre and use those for storage. same as NFS. while with iSCSI you have exported whole devices that can't be really shared with ease. and 100 times more expensive of course that just a cheap PC with cheap IDE drives.. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: iSCSI support
On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 12:24:49AM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > >and growing. I'm currently looking at a Coraid AoE > >(ATA-over-Ethernet) solution since it seems to have good support for > >FreeBSD and Windows drivers in the works. On the other hand, iSCSI > >has Windows support and FreeBSD in the works. > > > stupid question: can anyone explain me the sense and adventages of iSCSI > compared to say NFS? for me it's just some more layer to take lots of $$$ > from people. ICBW but to me it seems that iSCSI is like a distributed NFS backend. You can store the data on multiple devices, in multiple forms (as long as they all talk iSCSI). You can also have two storage sites (geographically separate) connected by fibre and use those for storage. -John ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: iSCSI support
and growing. I'm currently looking at a Coraid AoE (ATA-over-Ethernet) solution since it seems to have good support for FreeBSD and Windows drivers in the works. On the other hand, iSCSI has Windows support and FreeBSD in the works. stupid question: can anyone explain me the sense and adventages of iSCSI compared to say NFS? for me it's just some more layer to take lots of $$$ from people. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: iSCSI (revisited?)
- Original Message - From: "Justin Bennett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "FreeBSD Hackers" Cc: "FreeBSD Questions" Sent: Monday, April 04, 2005 5:30 PM Subject: iSCSI (revisited?) > All, > > I was wondering what people thought of iSCSI and FreeBSD. Is it a viable > option for creating SANs? > > I want to move away from tape backups, and have numerous production > FreeBSD machines that I need to back up data from. > > Any other ideas for a disk to disk backup solution that people have used? > > Thanks, > > Justin > Justin, what I'm currently using is the following for just that: Promise Vtrak 15100 with 15 250gb sata's, connected to a dual channel Adaptec 39160 housed in a Compaq ML 330 running FreeBSD 5.3. The Vtrak has 2 logical arrays assigned, where my other 14 servers (windows and freebsd alike) back up to one or the other arrays. I have one array shared via nfs for the bsd boxes to back up to and the other is samba shared so that windows systems can back up to that one. So far, it's worked well for me. All I need to do now is get the company to realize they still need tape if they want long term storage and then I can chain that to the Promise raid and have it back up to take during the day and still have my backup window in the early morning hours. -- Micheal Patterson Senior Communications Systems Engineer 405-917-0600 Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: iSCSI (revisited?)
> All, > > I was wondering what people thought of iSCSI and FreeBSD. Is it a viable > option for creating SANs? > refrase question. > I want to move away from tape backups, and have numerous production > FreeBSD machines that I need to back up data from. > for one, it depends on how deep are your pockets, 2nd the size of your data. 3rd how fast do you need to access the data, 4th from where, etc, etc, etc. > Any other ideas for a disk to disk backup solution that people have used? > We went the NAS/NFS route for most of our uses, and ONE application that has a huge database has a fiber channel link to the filer. The NAS is Raid4, with hot standbys, and we have not had a serious meltdown in years. Before NAS, we had to upgrade our servers, dump|restore, and the down times were getting larger, with the NAS, just add some disks, and no one is the wiser, life goes on. We still do tape backups, and move the tapes out of our premises just in case a major disaster hist us (someone misspoint a ICBM perhaps :-) having said all this, we are experimenting with iSCSI, and the numbers are not bad, about the same as NFS/NAS. Still, NFS is still our prefered solution. danny PS: AFAIK, there is only a iSCSI intitiator (beta), and no target for FreeBSD. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: iSCSI (revisited?)
Justin Bennett wrote: All, I was wondering what people thought of iSCSI and FreeBSD. Is it a viable option for creating SANs? I want to move away from tape backups, and have numerous production FreeBSD machines that I need to back up data from. Any other ideas for a disk to disk backup solution that people have used? You should check out rsnapshot. It does disk to disk backups either locally, or via ssh. I am using it to snapshot about 2TB of data to a 10TB (total) SAN, based on fiber channel. All FreeBSD backend, with assorted servers I'm backing up. Eric -- Eric AndersonSr. Systems AdministratorCentaur Technology A lost ounce of gold may be found, a lost moment of time never. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: iSCSI (revisited?)
Justin Bennett wrote: > All, > > I was wondering what people thought of iSCSI and FreeBSD. Is it a > viable option for creating SANs? > > I want to move away from tape backups, and have numerous production > FreeBSD machines that I need to back up data from. > > Any other ideas for a disk to disk backup solution that people have used? > > Thanks, > > Justin > For disk-to-disk backup take a look at BackupPC (don't let the name fool you it supports *nix clients). The nice thing about BackupPC is it does file pooling which saves *a lot* of space. John ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: iSCSI support?
In the last episode (Feb 28), Sam Farmer said: > What version(s) of FreeBSD, if any, support iSCSI storage connectivity? > Is there an open source FreeBSD iSCSI driver which would work with > ethernet adapters listed on the hardware compatibility lists? Do FreeBSD > drivers exist for iSCSI HBAs by Adaptec, Alacritech, Qlogic and/or > Intel? Any relevent information would be most helpful. Thanks! You're in luck ): Last week, Danny Braniss posted that he was looking for testers for an iSCSI initiator (for regular NICs) that he just finished. http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-scsi/2005-February/001740.html -- Dan Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: iSCSI support in FreeBSD?
--- Forrest Aldrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Is there planned iSCSI support in FreeBSD 4 or > 5. Well... no one else has responded. Considering I have nil experience, all I can do is offer links. http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040405125530.14f97d7a And you can navigate to... http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi for an updated man entry regarding ISP (specific to your chosen version of FreeBSD). Good luck. K. Greenwood __ Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
