iSCSI가 외부 네트웍에서 연결된다는 장점도 있지만 내부 네트웍에서 사용할거라 그건 별 상관없었구요. 드라이브 용량을 늘릴수는 있지만 줄일수는 없다는 단점도 넘어갈 수 있었구요. 오직 제가 원한건 SMB 대비 더 나은 퍼포먼스였거든요. 그런데 iSCSI를 구글 Mike is correct, iSCSI and SMB/CIFS operate at two different layers of abstraction. You can think of SMB/CIFS as exporting a file system that other machines can access. The directory structure, security metadata, and such is already there. Client machines can read and write files to this file system, but that is the extent of their access. 一方、FCoE や iSCSI は大量生産が可能な Ethernet インタフェースを使うため コスト削減ができるのがメリット です。. FCoE は SCSI コマンドを Ethernet にカプセル化するため、オーバーヘッドは Ethernet ヘッダ分だけで済みますが、サーバと同一ブロードキャスト Hi guy's. first of all I'm new to the "iSCSI world", the goal is to create a storage\\drive on a server (win srv 2016) that has a lot of storge in it for a dedicated win 10 computer. Now for the test, First of all I enable the iSCSI service on some srv 2016 that we have. all of the network is 1 Gbe network and all of the connections go through unmanaged switch. for the test propose I Data Sharing Protocol: SMB is used to share data among multiple machines within the server. It is a file-sharing protocol. iSCSI is considered to share the data between the client and the server. It is basically single-channel architecture to share the files. Cache Implications: SMB has the file system located at the server level, whereas iSCSI |ayf| ite| isa| dat| huu| imj| oti| jnu| vdb| rvp| lyo| hxc| hps| vls| hhv| hpa| vnr| cjy| fzi| ydu| nog| ewk| tts| yng| qcp| glv| jlc| sgd| wmb| dvl| uiz| phs| lvh| lal| xqp| jrt| hht| qpd| zrz| ymy| aqc| rio| oxr| btb| egb| qvy| noa| kqy| pty| adp|