topic Re: NFS vs iSCSI reliability on Cinder Backend??? in OpenStack Discussions

NFS vs iSCSI reliability on Cinder Backend???

SungminLee — Fri, 27 Oct 2017 01:01:14 GMT

Hello.

I run Netapp FAS8040 for Openstack Cinder Backend based on iSCSI protocol.

But iSCSI sometimes occur some problems like multipath issues.

So Netapp saids chaging backend protocol iSCSI -> NFS.

Because NFS is simple and easy to manage + some features are better than iSCSI.

But someone say that iSCSI is more reliable than NFS.

In their opinion, Cinder Backend based on iSCSI causes VM level trouble.

On the other hand, Cinder Backend bases on NFS causes Hypevisor level trouble.

Whay do you think about this?

Thank you.

Re: NFS vs iSCSI reliability on Cinder Backend???

dblackwe — Thu, 01 Mar 2018 14:46:29 GMT

I always run NFS for my cinder backends. It allows a smoother performance drop at high loads, and I don't have any issues with it versus iSCSI. Also running as NFS gives easier access to individual Cinder volume files for loop mounting purposes on remote locations.

Re: NFS vs iSCSI reliability on Cinder Backend???

Loai_abdulsalam — Tue, 27 Oct 2020 22:44:06 GMT

Hi, can you advise how I can set QoS at the File level?

also in case of space overprovisioning, how i can get the details of each file statistics?

thanks in advance.