On 5/22/07, Mark Hull-Richter <mhullrich@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 5/22/07, Ross S. W. Walker <rwalker@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > The ability of iSCSI to support high throughput depends on: > > 1) How the back-end storage being served up by iSCSI is configured > 2) How the network interconnects between the iSCSI targets and > initiators are configured > 3) How well the FTP software does at reading the data from disk and > pumping it out the network > > 1Gbps ethernet can handle up to 115MB/s per interface. Using MPIO > round-robin over several interfaces you can continue to add throughput > if the application can scale well across these multiple paths. > I'm a little fuzzy on this Mb vs MB issue - which one is megaBITS and which is megaBYTES, and is this a standard convention or ??? Thanks.
20 years ago, Megabit was 2^20 bits (Mb) and Megabyte was 2^20 bytes (MB). The SI (ISO?) redid the units later to deal with the fact that Mega has a scientific definition of 10^6. This also allows the Hard-drive conspiracy to undersell you the number of bits on a disk. Nowadays, Mb is supposed to mean 10^6 bits, and a Mibit means 2^20 bits. Thus you end up with a gigabit card which is 10^6 bits but the OS measures in 2^20 bits. References http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megabit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megabyte -- Stephen J Smoogen. -- CSIRT/Linux System Administrator How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice" _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
