Hi. On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 08:09:48AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote: > On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 10:07:28AM +0300, Reco wrote: > > Personally I'd rather use conventional network bonding on NFS server, > > and be done with it. > > Conventional network bonding doesn't speed up a single stream, which is why > people have been looking for alternatives.
That's something I agree with. But the way I see the things, if one's really needs I/O bandwidth, low latency and IOPS done in consumer-grade hardware, one should use FCoE, not NFS. Especially if that's 'one initiator - one target' configuration. NFS was designed for multiple clients concurrently accessing the sames shares, and in this scenario bonding seems much more simplier and justified solution. Reco
