It depends, if you are looking for performance, definately SAN.
iSCSI might have a better performance over GNBD.
I found this on google http://www.bwbug.org/docs/RedHat-GNBD-Ethernet-SAN.pdf
It has some detais about GFS on SAN and on GNBD, It might help though.3
Good Luck and keep us posted.
Att.
FTM
On 4/26/06, Sander van Beek - Elexis <sander@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi all,
We did a quick benchmark on our 2 node rhel4 testcluster with gfs and
a gnbd storage server. The results were very sad. One of the nodes
(p3 1ghz, 512 mb) could run +/- 2400 insert queries per second when
running mysqld-max 5.0.20 on a local ext3 filesystem. With a 2 node
GFS over GNBD setup and inserts on both nodes at the same time, we
only could do 80 inserts per second. I'm very interested in the
perfomance others got in a similar setup. Would the performance
increase when we use software based iscsi instead of gnbd?
Or should we simply buy SAN equipment? Does anyone have statistics to
compare a standalone mysql setup to a small gfs cluster using a san?
With best regards,
Sander van Beek
---------------------------------------
Ing. S. van Beek
Elexis
Marketing 9
6921 RE Duiven
The Netherlands
Tel: +31 (0)26 7110329
Mob: +31 (0)6 28395109
Fax: +31 (0)318 611112
Email: sander@xxxxxxxxx
Web: http://www.elexis.nl
--
Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
-- Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
