How to setup iscsi vmware esxi 6.7 windows#
I realize that there are a lot of ways of benchmarking, but at this point the numbers from a simple CrystalDiskMark (or whatever) on a Windows VM would be very useful information. Have you run benchmarks on Windows VMs on ESXi with an iSCSI data store (1 or 10 Gbps)? What kind of numbers do you get? Having some idea of what numbers to expect (especially for writes) would be very helpful. Is not yet in production and was not part of these numbers. I am not sure that this have much bearing on my current situation since the new server that we are deploying soon Also, please note that the heaviest usage is off-hours when the backups run (all production VMs getting backed up by Veeam). Peak Aggregate Network usage: 99.4 MB/s.
I ran a d-pack on the live system a few months ago: Out of curiosity: what makes NFS a better protocol than iSCSI for ESXi data storage? What is your live system producing in terms of throughput?Ĭan you move this iSCSI to another switch and re-test? NFS is a better protocol unless you specifically need block level control or intend to pass SCSI commands directly to the storage (in most cases), but local is the #1 option unless you need major throughput or multitude of hosts, or specifically SCSI control.
How to setup iscsi vmware esxi 6.7 free#
Alternatively I can perhaps free up another 1 Gbps NIC and do direct connections between the hosts for the StarWind iSCSI to eliminate the switch from the equation altogether. I have not yet rebooted the iSCSI switches - it is a bit difficult in our 24x7 production environment, but I will look into doing this. The production SAN is using 4 NICs (2 per node) and the production QNAP is using 4 NICs each ESXi host has 2 iSCSI NICs. The storage is not in use like I stated, "I believe the StarWind scenario might be the best for testing, since there are no other VMs on this storage." Have you tried the simplest and sometimes most obvious reboot the switch? With 2 hosts local storage always wins, unless you have a specific use case, but for 99% of setups this small local storage per host or a vSAN will outperform iSCSI many times, and you are also limited to a single NIC. Running your test from a guest isn't a true test, but you didn't state if the iSCSI storage was empty or in use, if it is in use, you also have to factor in the other hosts and VMs chatting too. With the VM on the local 10K RPM OS disk, the same operation took 1:06 minutes. I first noticed the performance issue when trying to create an empty SQL 10GB database and it took 36 minutes(!). It has one small disk on each storage for testing. The tests were run on a Windows 2016 Server test VM that I setup for this purpose. I believe the StarWind scenario might be the best for testing, since there are no other VMs on this storage, it uses only one iSCSI NIC (=no MPIO to consider) and it has its own separate iSCSI VLAN. The cluster has ~30 VMs (a mix of CentOS and Windows), but I did my testing on an ESXi host which had no other VMs running on there. You don't tell us how many VMs per storage or what they are but your systems could be doing a lot of small IO which isn't as friendly as larger reads.Īlso, where are you running Crystaldisk mark form? With your host count I would be looking at some form of vSAN, starwind only requires 2 hosts, VMware's offering requires 3. It's not just overhead, what is the IO currently passing, lots of small reads/writes is going to be harsher than larger sequential read/write.
0 kommentar(er)
