>哪种技术更有效“提高吞吐量”？ (如果你可以提供任何比较,那将会很棒)就我完成谷歌工作而言,有两种技术可以在一个网卡内部提供额外的路径.
链路聚合控制协议和多路径I / O.如果有人可以向我提供这些技术的任何好处或缺点,那将是很好的.
(我问好奇的第二个问题,只是想听听你的意见)
>哪种连接更合适(FC的以太网)？
我听说在比较以太网和FC时,以太网连接速度较慢.
主要关注以太网的原因如下：
Modern Ethernet supports speeds of 100Gb/s per link,with latencies of
several microseconds,and combined with the hardware-accelerated iSER
block protocol,it’s perfect for supporting maximum performance on
non-volatile memory (NVM),whether today’s flash or tomorrow’s
next-gen solid state storage.
>现代以太网优于光纤通道
Today’s Ethernet runs at 25,40,50,or 100Gb/s speeds. Meanwhile,
Fibre Channel is still transitioning to 16Gb/s technology and thinking
about 32Gb/s in 2016,which is slower than what Ethernet was
supporting 3 years ago.
> iSER涡轮增压iSCSI
iSER adds RDMA support to iSCSI. This lets the network cards offload
the iSCSI protocol and network transport to the NIC,supporting even
higher performance and lower latency with low cpu utilization.
有更多理由,请阅读引用文章：http://www.mellanox.com/blog/2015/12/top-7-reasons-why-fibre-channel-is-doomed/
话虽这么说,提高吞吐量的选项是链路聚合控制协议和多路径I / O.如果您关注的是冗余和故障转移,则可以使用这些技术中的任何一种来实现弹性.对于需要性能的情况,关注MPIO,因为它允许使用更多链接,从而实现更高的吞吐量.如需深入了解比较,请查看原帖：https://www.starwindsoftware.com/blog/lacp-vs-mpio-on-windows-platform-which-one-is-better-in-terms-of-redundancy-and-speed-in-this-case-2.
