Take the 2-minute tour ×
Server Fault is a question and answer site for professional system and network administrators. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Would it make sense to virtualize windows using Xen or VMware ESX and expose storage on a JBOD as NFS, instead of exposing storage as CIFS/SMB for better I/O throughput?

Is it true that the below can yield only 20MB/sec for CIFS/SMB; 80MB/sec for NFS? assuming i use 2-3 servers (1Gbps NIC), NIC teaming, switch binding, jumbo frames etc...

My test rig can only afford:

  • Storage server: HP DL370G6: 2x Xeon 55xx -CPU, 16GB RAM, 300GB 10K RPM SAS, P410i - 512MB cache
  • Windows server: HP DL580: 2x Xeon 56xx, 64GB RAM, 1G NIC
  • HP procurve 3500 layer3 switch - 1GB

Planning to use distributed file system: GlusterFS (user space) over Redhat ent Linux 5.5/ext3 FS, but I am attracted by a Solaris post about CIFS @ 1Gbytes/sec !

http://blogs.oracle.com/brendan/entry/cifs_at_1_gbyte_sec

I am torn between the two... I know my hardware is not at par with above post, but does OpenSolaris offer better CIFS/SMB perf than any other?

Thanks in advance for your thoughts!

share|improve this question

1 Answer 1

I have a few Dell 2950's with lesser specs than your machines running Debian Lenny and they can easily max two bonded gigabit links using Samba. All of them have big SATA RAID-6's attached to them so they're not IOPS kings, but with large reads they keep the pipes filled.

That blog you linked was 1 giga*byte*/s.

share|improve this answer
    
yup, blog was about 1GB/s performance, any computer from the past 2 years with 4 1TB SATA disks can sustain 1 gigabit/s reads –  Hubert Kario Oct 4 '10 at 18:10
    
thank guys, corrected the post about bytes! what kind of a switch were you using? –  John-ZFS Oct 5 '10 at 1:11

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.