Can iSCSI compete against Fibre channel SAN connectivity? Print E-mail
Written by Richard Thompson, Wednesday, 11 April 2007

Is iSCSI able to hold its own against Fibre channel SANs?

The answer is simple, I don't know. Each technology has its pro's and cons and over the past few months a lot of companies have been doing research and investing in such technologies. Virtual infrastructure is becoming a large part of our industry and in order to accomodate this SANs are becoming a larger and larger part as well.

One of the first disadvantages of iSCSI that everyone comments about is performance. Because iSCSI makes use of your regular ethernet network equipment it has throughputs of 1GBps. When you compare this to the 4GBps you can get from Fibre you start to get concerned. Fear not. eWeek labs did a comparison between iSCSI and Fibre interfaces to their AX100 SAN solution which was used for their test Exhange database and found that performance differences between the two was negligable. This is great news for iSCSI especially when you consider that 10GB ethernet switches are now available.

The next major disadvantage is that you need specific iSCSI initiator software installed on your Servers. This used to be a problem for people using certain operating systems. That said, Most major operating systems now include iSCSI initiator software. Sometimes not all built in but all are freely available for download on the companies websites. The only exception to the rule is Mac OSx.

iSCSI does consume server processor cycles however storage managers have produced a workaround to this. The solution is to install TCP Offload Engine (TOE) cards in your servers. So when pricing a solution you need to take this into account.

So far everything I have mentioned have been indicating as to why you should not go with iSCSI, now lets look at the positive points.

For a start iSCSI is considerably cheaper. In eWeeks survey the initial setup was US$4000 cheaper to setup and once you have the initial infrastucture in place cost per server is significantly lower to add additional servers to an iSCSI based solution.

The reason for this is because the components are more readily available and you can use existing LAN infrastructure instead of needing to activate another port on the fabric switch, assigning LUN's, etc!

Support costs are also significantly lower because you don't need to employ storage expert and most IT Managers or Technicians are familiar with Ethernet and IP Networking making it possible for them to install and configure the solution themselves, albeit with a few minutes reading.

In short, iSCSI may not be 100% ready to take on some of the larger more sophisticated Fibre Channel solutions, but they are definately on the way up particularly for small to medium size companies and there is a bright future in the market for iSCSI. Businesses who choose to implement iSCSI should keep the following in mind, spend a little extra cash to buy good quality network equipment. Doing this will help ensure optimum performance and where possible use seperate network infrstructure for your iSCSI network. Doing so will prevent this from competing with regular network traffic!

Sources:
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1925404,00.asp 
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1926088,00.asp

Comments
Add NewSearchRSS
Lukas Zawilski Unregistered | 2007-04-11 22:40:49
Some valid points there Richard. I've been working with iSCSI since about 2004 and found it to be very competitive with the SAN solutions. The one main thing to remember is to ensure you're iSCSI network runs over decent networking gear (some switches are better at facilitating iSCSI than others) and to give iSCSI it's own network so that it doesn't complete with usual LAN traffic.
EkilErif Manager | 2007-04-12 10:27:10
Very valid. Thanks, I will update the article!
Mutsje - I/O performance Super Administrator | 2007-04-14 10:52:54
The main bottleneck with SAN's is the I/O troughput. The scsi driver can handle about 256 threads in one time if I remember correctly, Microsoft has come up with a new driver (lost name but it's in SP1 for win2k3) and that handles more I/O interupt requests. So the troughput becomes much higher. Long time I thought the bottleneck would be the network but as most networks with SAN are on fibrechannel with troughputs of 1GB or more that isn't the bottleneck anymore. I will have to come back on the driver name
Write comment
Name:
Title:
UBBCode:
[b] [i] [u] [url] [quote] [code] [img] 
 

Powered by JoomlaCommentCopyright (C) 2006 Frantisek Hliva. All rights reserved.Homepage: http://cavo.co.nr/

 
< Prev   Next >