Re: Direct NFS anyone?
From: Gerard H. Pille <ghp_at_skynet.be>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 22:51:34 +0100
Message-ID: <4d112165$0$14250$ba620e4c_at_news.skynet.be>
Noons wrote:
> Gerard H. Pille wrote,on my timestamp of 20/12/2010 11:57 PM:
>
>>>
>>>> Or is nobody using it?
>>>
>>> Count 1 here.
>>
>> It feels great not to be alone. We can form a duo.
>>
>> We're testing with Oracles Linux on VMWare, database files hosted by NetApp.
>>
>> Too many variables to locate the bottleneck. When I ran my test yesterday
>> evening, having all systems to myself, performance was 4 times better than
>> during working hours.
>
> Errr.... I meant: count 1 not using it.
> We might have to, if the new hardware ends up being Netapp. But I'm sticking to iscsi and/or fc
> for the time being, until someone proves to me d-nfs can do everything it promises at all times.
> We all know lab conditions are not real life ones...
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 22:51:34 +0100
Message-ID: <4d112165$0$14250$ba620e4c_at_news.skynet.be>
Noons wrote:
> Gerard H. Pille wrote,on my timestamp of 20/12/2010 11:57 PM:
>
>>>
>>>> Or is nobody using it?
>>>
>>> Count 1 here.
>>
>> It feels great not to be alone. We can form a duo.
>>
>> We're testing with Oracles Linux on VMWare, database files hosted by NetApp.
>>
>> Too many variables to locate the bottleneck. When I ran my test yesterday
>> evening, having all systems to myself, performance was 4 times better than
>> during working hours.
>
> Errr.... I meant: count 1 not using it.
> We might have to, if the new hardware ends up being Netapp. But I'm sticking to iscsi and/or fc
> for the time being, until someone proves to me d-nfs can do everything it promises at all times.
> We all know lab conditions are not real life ones...
Oh great! One down. And as the other reactions show, no one is using it. Received on Tue Dec 21 2010 - 15:51:34 CST