Hello, I am fairly new to Solaris and ZFS. I am testing both out in a sandbox at work. I am playing with virtual machines running on a windows front-end that connects to a zfs back-end for its data needs. As far as i know my two options are sharesmb and shareiscsci for data sharing. I have a couple questions about which way I should go. Is there a performance increase by using iSCSI? If I go with iSCSI will I have to then format NTFS on the Windows iSCSI disk? I would want the ability to create snapshots of the virtual disks, If I have to format the iSCSI target with NTFS on the windows machine ZFS would not see the individual files correct? Again this is new territory for me and I have been doing a lot of reading. Thanks in advance for any input. P.S. I know this is not an ideal situation for VM or storage, but it is what I have been given to work with. This message posted from opensolaris.org
Justin, Thanks for the reply In the environment I currently work in, the "powers that be" are almost completely anti unix. Installing the nfs client on all machines would take a real good sales pitch. None the less I am still playing with the client in our sandbox. As I install this on a test machine a question popped into my mind. Does this passthrough AD credentials? How does one control authentication? I haven''t read anything on this yet, and will do some searching, just thought I''d pick your brain a bit. The biggest reason I am drawn to ZFS is zpool. I like the idea I can keep adding raidz arrays to a large shared pool when ever I want. With iscsi sharing I am forced to make "Volumes" I don''t know that I really like this idea outside of the scope of making iSCSI OS partitions. For network files and shares I really want to be able utilize snapshots and other features of the ZFS filesystem. If I share out via SMB do the files not sit on the zfs FS and get captured in snapshots indiviually? My understanding was it just uses the CIFS protocol, but you still gain the benefits of the ZFS File System on the backend. The tough thing is trying to make this fit well in a Windows world. -Craig> sharesmb presents ntfs to windows, so you''re still hampered by that file > system''s ''features'' such as lots of broadcast packets and a long timeout. > > One other option you should consider is using NFS, for which you can > install > a windows client. See http://support.microsoft.com/kb/324055 or google > ''nfs > windows client'' > > justinThis message posted from opensolaris.org
On May 30, 2008, at 10:45 AM, Craig Smith wrote:> The tough thing is trying to make this fit > well in a Windows world.If you hang all the disks off the OpenSolaris system directly, and export via CIFS ... isn''t it just a NAS box from the windows perspective? If so, how is it any harder to explain/fit than a NetApp box (or any other commercial NAS solution)? -- Keith H. Bierman khbkhb at gmail.com | AIM kbiermank 5430 Nassau Circle East | Cherry Hills Village, CO 80113 | 303-997-2749 <speaking for myself*> Copyright 2008
On May 30, 2008, at 6:49 AM 5/30/, Craig J Smith wrote:> > It also should be noted that I am > having to run on Solaris and not Opensolaris due to adaptec > am79c973 scsi > driver issues in Opensolaris.Well that is probably a showstopper then, since the in-kernel support isn''t in the production Solaris leg yet. -- Keith H. Bierman khbkhb at gmail.com | AIM kbiermank 5430 Nassau Circle East | Cherry Hills Village, CO 80113 | 303-997-2749 <speaking for myself*> Copyright 2008
> Justin, > > Thanks for the reply > > In the environment I currently work in, the "powers > that be" are almost > completely anti unix. Installing the nfs client on > all machines would take > a real good sales pitch. None the less I am stillI''ve pro unix & I''m against putting NFS on all the PC clients as well. Putting Samba on the server and leaving the PCs alone will be much easier to manage then NFS clients. I suspect the performance and security on the PCs would be better too. Samba can authenticate to AD or have it own seperate passowrd setup. If it''s a Windows shop, use AD. I''ve not played with the CIFS in ZFS yet, but I have older Solaris installs and Samba works well enough that I don''t have a need to switch yet.> playing with the client > in our sandbox. As I install this on a test machine a > question popped into > my mind. Does this passthrough AD credentials? How > does one control > authentication? I haven''t read anything on this yet, > and will do some > searching, just thought I''d pick your brain a bit.Samba does. I think CIFS in ZFS would be done with PAM?> > The biggest reason I am drawn to ZFS is zpool. I like > the idea I can keep > adding raidz arrays to a large shared pool when ever > I want. With iscsi > sharing I am forced to make "Volumes" I don''t know > that I really like this > idea outside of the scope of making iSCSI OS > partitions. For network files > and shares I really want to be able utilize snapshots > and other features > of the ZFS filesystem. If I share out via SMB do the > files not sit on the > zfs FS and get captured in snapshots indiviually? MySnapshots are done in ZFS on the host.> understanding was it > just uses the CIFS protocol, but you still gain the > benefits of the ZFS > File System on the backend. The tough thing is trying > to make this fit > well in a Windows world.Not really. Samba makes all the OS stuff transparent to the windows user. Just like in Linux. The big change is getting an ECC, snapshotting filesystem on the host.> > -Craig > > > sharesmb presents ntfs to windows, so you''re still > hampered by that file > > system''s ''features'' such as lots of broadcast > packets and a long timeout. > > > > One other option you should consider is using NFS, > for which you can > > install > > a windows client. See > http://support.microsoft.com/kb/324055 or google > > ''nfs > > windows client'' > > > > justinThis message posted from opensolaris.org