I'm trying to decide which is a better option performance-wise but getting some unreliable results when using NFS.
The storage server is running OpenMediaVault with a 4 disk Raid10 array. It's connected via gigabit ethernet on the same switch as the Proxmox node.
For my NFS share I created a LVM logical volume on top of the Raid10 array, then formatted it using ext4 and created a new target for NFS. Set this up in Proxmox as a NFS storage and installed Windows 2012 R2 cleanly on a 256GB partition. I then ran CrystalDiskMark to compare the two storage types.
Initial results varied wildly starting off getting reads of over 1000MB/sec, after a few runs it levelled out but still getting results greater than the available network bandwidth, see below:
Then I removed all the NFS config and targets, removed the LVM volumes on the storage server and created a iSCSI target pointing to the raw Raid10 array. I then created an iSCSI target in Proxmox and a LVM group on top of that. These results are more along the lines of what I expected, see below:
Can anyone shed some light on why the NFS storage appears to be faster?
TIA
The storage server is running OpenMediaVault with a 4 disk Raid10 array. It's connected via gigabit ethernet on the same switch as the Proxmox node.
For my NFS share I created a LVM logical volume on top of the Raid10 array, then formatted it using ext4 and created a new target for NFS. Set this up in Proxmox as a NFS storage and installed Windows 2012 R2 cleanly on a 256GB partition. I then ran CrystalDiskMark to compare the two storage types.
Initial results varied wildly starting off getting reads of over 1000MB/sec, after a few runs it levelled out but still getting results greater than the available network bandwidth, see below:
Then I removed all the NFS config and targets, removed the LVM volumes on the storage server and created a iSCSI target pointing to the raw Raid10 array. I then created an iSCSI target in Proxmox and a LVM group on top of that. These results are more along the lines of what I expected, see below:
Can anyone shed some light on why the NFS storage appears to be faster?
TIA