Eugen Leitl wrote:
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 05:56:18PM -0500, Patrick Geoffray wrote:
I'll second this recommendation. The Coraid servers are fairly
+1. The AoE spec is very simple, I wish it would have more traction
outside CoRaID. On the opposite, iSCSI is a utter mess with all the bad
techn
Tim Cutts wrote:
on between the two. We've been looking at iSCSI for our VMware setup in
the future. As people have been saying, performance isn't stellar, an
to get it decent you still end up paying a lot of money on networking
kit, because ideally in that scenario you still want the storag
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 05:18:17PM -0600, Rahul Nabar wrote:
> I totally agree! Especially for my "tiny" storage capacity (~5
> Terabytes) the cost of the non-disk accessories
> (enclosure+controllers+cables) is turning out to be several fold that
> of the disks themselves! That was pretty surpri
[Apologies if you got multiple copies of this email. If you'd like to
opt out of these announcements, information on how to unsubscribe is
available at the bottom of this email.]
CALL FOR PAPERS
===
Third International Workshop on Parallel Programming Models
and Systems Software for
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 05:56:18PM -0500, Patrick Geoffray wrote:
> >I'll second this recommendation. The Coraid servers are fairly
>
> +1. The AoE spec is very simple, I wish it would have more traction
> outside CoRaID. On the opposite, iSCSI is a utter mess with all the bad
> technical choic
On 19 Feb 2010, at 11:56 pm, Mark Hahn wrote:
however, I'm not actually claiming iSCSI is prevalent. the protocol
is relatively heavy-weight, and it's really only providing SAN access,
not shared, file-level access, which is ultimately what most want...
iSCSI seems fairly common in the virtu
