Fiber, iSCSI, NAS: Who is the best storage type for server virtualization?

Because every application environment is different, even if it performs well in one place, there is no guarantee that it will be equally applicable in other places. For server virtualization environments, Fibre Channel storage is the traditional choice. But now the popularity of iSCSI and NAS is getting higher and higher, after all, their cost performance is more prominent. Let's take a look at the specifications and characteristics of each network storage technology and analyze their advantages and disadvantages one by one. Fibre Channel Storage Sheet From the point of view of performance and reliability, Fibre Channel is undoubtedly an excellent storage architecture, which is difficult to compare with other products. However, everything has two sides. Using Fibre Channel storage can indeed achieve high performance, but users must bear higher costs and face more complex technical architecture. However, Fibre Channel technology has a long history and a very good foundation in the field of data centers. Therefore, large-scale virtualized environments usually tend to choose Fibre Channel. These users mainly consider the factors of speed and reliability (the current bandwidth of Fibre Channel is 8 Gbps, and the next generation is 16 Gbps). In addition, Fibre Channel storage networks have always been relatively independent, so they are more secure than Ethernet-based storage devices. The problem is that Fibre Channel requires special HBA host adapters and special switches, which are more expensive than similar accessories used in Ethernet. Objectively speaking, it is very expensive to build a Fibre Channel network from scratch. In addition, the deployment and management of Fibre Channel environments are more complicated. Compared with traditional network architecture, it is very difficult to configure, and few people are familiar with this technology. At present, many companies have skilled network administrators, but few companies have management talents in Fibre Channel storage networks. Designing and managing SAN architecture usually requires special training, which invisibly further increases the implementation cost. Advantages of Fibre Channel storage: FC is the first choice for deploying enterprise storage architecture, and many application environments are already using SAN, which usually performs best because of its high available bandwidth; Independent Fibre Channel network is more secure; There are also access control mechanisms such as LUN partitioning and LUN masking. Support to boot from SAN (boot from storage system), the server does not need hard disk locally; Depending on the block storage type, you can use the VMFS volume (a file system) that comes with VMware vSphere. Insufficient Fibre Channel storage: If you build from scratch, the deployment cost will be high; Need special and expensive accessories, such as switches, cables, HBA cards, etc. Implementation and management may be more complicated, and full-time storage administrators are usually needed; There are few available security control functions, and it is complicated to realize authentication and encryption. If the user's physical server runs multiple virtual machines and the application type requires high disk I/O, then in order to obtain the best performance, the user may seriously consider using the Fibre Channel storage system. In addition, FCoE is also an option, which is equivalent to carrying Fibre Channel protocol on traditional Ethernet devices. But at present, FCoE must be deployed in the same expensive 10 Gbps Ethernet environment, which requires special switching equipment. If the user's application environment already has a Fibre Channel SAN, it is appropriate to use Fibre Channel storage when building a virtualization platform. Expanding an existing SAN environment is easy and much cheaper than deploying a completely new environment. If the user's budget is sufficient and he has the technical ability to manage complex environment, then choosing Fibre Channel storage is definitely correct.