Riaan van Niekerk wrote:
1 The reasoning behind it being similar to why software RAID 1 (with a
big, idle Xeon behind it beats the pants of dedicated hardware RAID 1
with its relatively underpowered ASIC.
Surely though that doesn't apply in cases where the server is performing
CPU-bound work.
The servers in my case are used mostly for running large parallel builds
of projects comprising multiple millions of lines of code. As well as
the disk activity for shifting the source off the disk and writing back
the compiled objects, your CPU is spending all it's time doing the
compilation work. If it has to stop compiling in order to do TCP/IP as
well, well that's bad.
Basically in that environment you can never have enough CPU.
2 Also, the TCP offload engine (TOE) in a hardware initiator should give
it an edge, but most server NIC vendors are starting to bundle TOE in
their regular NICs, negating this performance benefit of dedicated iSCSI
HW.
If possible, get a demo QLA iSCSI HBA and test the two.
Good advice..
--
Linux-cluster mailing list
Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
