Since Windows Server 2019 release, the Internet is booming with its reviews. Someday, I maybe write my own one too. Till then, why don’t we focus on something more important than just listing new Windows Server features? In today’s post, I share the scripts for creating and formatting bootable USB disks for Windows Server.
In the previous article, I’ve measured the performance of NFS vs iSCSI to find out which network protocol is faster as a storage for virtual machines on VMware ESXi. Well, iSCSI beats NFS under all testing patterns. Additionally, I’ve evaluated and compared the performance of NFS client connected to Linux (Ubuntu Server 17.10 distributive) and to Windows Server 2016. According to the results, NFS server performance on Linux was higher than that on Windows.
In the previous parts, I’ve shown you the process of configuring NFS and iSCSI protocols between our servers. So now, we’ve got everything ready for running our performance tests and finally finding out which network protocol is faster as a storage for virtual machines on VMware ESXi: NFS or iSCSI.
So to benchmark the iSCSI performance, I’ve created the StarWind device on the server and connected it to the ESXi host over the iSCSI protocol. As to OS for running further tests, I’ve used Windows Server 2016.
Cheers friends, not so long ago we’ve run through the process of configuring an NFS disk and connecting it to the VMware host. What we’re gonna do is measure and compare the performance of NFS and iSCSI network protocols to see which one is more suitable for building a virtualized infrastructure. So, in this part, we’ll create an iSCSI device and connect it to the VMware ESXi host.
Hi there! There have been pretty much debates over which network protocol is better: NFS or iSCSI when building a virtualization infrastructure. Some experts argue that iSCSI gives better performance and reliability due to block-based storage approach while others go in favour of NFS citing management simplicity, large data stores and the availability of cost-saving features like data deduplication on some NFS arrays.
Anyway, we’re not here for polemics but to see which protocol is better for your production environment, meaning, which one really provides higher performance for your mission-critical applications. That’s what we all want, right?
Just to make it clear, the whole project will be divided into three parts: configuring NFS, configuring iSCSI, and the testing itself.
So, first things first. In this first chapter, I’ll guide you through the process of configuring and preparing the NFS protocol for further testing.
So, as Michael Buffer uses to say: “Let’s get ready to rumble!”.
Subscribe to our posts
- Performance comparison: SQL Server Failover Cluster Instance on S2D vs. SQL Server Basic Availability Groups on Storage Spaces. The battle starts
- Can SQL Server Failover Cluster Instances run on S2D twice as fast as SQL Server Basic Availability Groups on Storage Spaces? Part 2: Studying FCI performance
- Can SQL Server Failover Cluster Instance run on S2D twice as fast as SQL Server Basic Availability Groups on Storage Spaces? Part 1: Studying BAG performance
- What is a Hyper-V Quick Create VM gallery & how to create one?
- How to create a bootable USB for Windows Server 2019 installation?