Continuing the FCoE Discussion

blog.scottlowe.org has a nice post titled Continuing the FCoE Discussion

Lunk : http://blog.scottlowe.org/2008/12/09/continuing-the-fcoe-discussion/


Tonight, after reading a blog post by Dave Graham regarding FCoE vs. InfiniBand, I started thinking about FCoE again, and I came up with a question I want to ask. I’m not a storage expert, and I don’t have decades of experience in the storage arena like many others that write about storage. The question I’m about to ask, then, may just be the uneducated ranting of a fool. If so, you’re welcome to enlighten me in the comments.

Here’s the question: how is FCoE any better than iSCSI?

I tend to get slightly fired up about this and I did post a comment, which is awaiting moderation.

I will quote it here

slowe,

I tend to agree with you, additionally, it is very easy to scale iSCSI, where you are stuck with one controller on a EMC / Netapp FC array, each iSCSI array ( EQL) has it’s own controller.

Therefore, if you have three racks of EMC or Three Racks of EQL, ( 12 per rack ) the array each have two controller’s each ( or at least most that I have seen do ) where the , EQL iSCSI, would have something like 36 controllers, vs three EMC controllers for the same amount of storage.

Now Even if you had 8 GB FC, wouldn’t you be limited to 8GB X 4ports X 3 Controllers = 96 GB

To make it even, lets say you had iSCSI sans with 10 GB controllers, 10 GB X 2port X 36 Controllers = 720 GB

Hence, if you had a Six top end switches @ 10 GB, Connected to 36 10 GB Sans all on the same switch back plane, wouldn’t the EQL have better throughput than FC Over Ethernet?

Written by Roger Lund

VMware and Storage crazy man, vExpert, MN VMUG leader