From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: adfas asd <chimera_god@yahoo.com>
Subject: RE: NAS Remote Side of a Mirror
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 04:39:35 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <906812.26904.qm@web38804.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <4D87015385157D4285D56CA6101072FF2CB51276@exchange07.valvesoftware.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Return-path: <linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <4D87015385157D4285D56CA6101072FF2CB51276@exchange07.valvesoftware.com>
Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-raid.ids

--- On Wed, 10/7/09, Chris Green <cgreen@valvesoftware.com> wrote:
> Why do you think samba would be a bad
> choice? I did a quick search for qnap benchmarks, and the
> numbers didn't look
> like anything special compared to my "generic pc + linux +
> software raid + samba + gbE" setup.

Samba was great, and I used it through the 20th century, but compared with FUSE it sucks in so many ways, as does NFS


--- On Thu, 10/8/09, Robin Hill <robin@robinhill.me.uk> wrote:
> The lowest level approach would probably be to export it as
> iSCSI - I
> don't know what overhead the software initiator has for
> that (or what a
> hardware initiator would cost) though.

Interesting.  No idea what iSCSI is, but I'll research it.