Re: [sfpug] DATA directory on network attached storage

Aditya wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 10:59:51AM -0700, Joe Conway wrote:
>>Any particular reason? Our NetApp technical rep advised nfs over iSCSI,
>>IIRC because of performance.
>
> I would mount the Netapp volume(s) as a block level device on my server using
> iSCSI (vs. a file-based device like NFS) so that filesystem parameters could
> be more finely tuned and one could really make use of jumbo frames over GigE.

Actually, we're using jumbo frames over GigE with nfs too.

> I'm not sure I understand why NFS would perform better than iSCSI -- in any
> case, some large Oracle dbs at my current job are moving to iSCSI on Netapp
> and in that environment both Oracle and Netapp advise iSCSI (probably because
> Oracle uses the block-level device directly), so I suspend the difference in
> performance is minimal.

We also have Oracle DBs via nfs mounted Netapp, again per the local
guru's advice. It might be one of those things that is still being
debated even within Netapp's ranks (or maybe our info is dated - worth a
check).

Thanks,

Joe